The principle: zero invented data
Every figure, every mechanism, every claim published on VivanaFem must be traceable to a published scientific source. If we cannot find a reliable source, the information is not published, even if it circulates everywhere else.
How we choose our sources
PubMed search first. We start from the reference database of the biomedical literature, favoring recent publications and peer-reviewed journals.
Hierarchy of evidence. On any given topic, we favor, in this order: meta-analyses and systematic reviews, randomized clinical trials, large cohort studies, then observational studies. Animal and in vitro studies are flagged as such.
One-by-one verification. Every reference (PMID) is checked before writing: the study exists, it actually says what we make it say, and its limitations are taken into account. No “second-hand” citations.
Sources published alongside the content. References are listed at the end of each article (and in our video descriptions) with their PubMed link, so that you can check them yourself.
What we do with nuance
The science of menopause is evolving and carries areas of uncertainty. When the evidence is modest, emerging or contradictory, we say so explicitly, rather than promising results. An effect “shown in some women” never becomes “scientifically proven for all”.
Updates and corrections policy
Health information goes out of date. We would rather correct quickly and say so than leave an error online.
- Every article displays its publication date and its last updated date. These dates also appear in the page's structured data, readable by search engines.
- Revision when the science moves. When a meta-analysis or a recommendation from a learned society changes the picture on a topic we have already covered, the article concerned is reworked and its updated date changed.
- Reporting open to everyone. An error, a figure that looks wrong to you, a study we should have cited, a misread source: write to contact@vivanafem.com or use the contact form. We reply within 3 business days.
- What we do with a report. We go back to the cited source and we reread it. If the error is confirmed, the page is corrected and its updated date changed. If it is not, we explain why to the person who reported it.
- Substantive corrections are flagged. A simple typo is fixed silently. But when a correction changes the meaning of a claim, a figure or a conclusion, it is indicated by a dated note at the end of the article: readers must be able to know that the text has changed, and on what.
- Removal. If a claim proves indefensible and no serious source supports it, the passage is removed rather than rewritten at the margins.
Who funds the site, and our conflicts of interest
A health website must say where its money comes from. VivanaFem is funded by the advertising displayed on its pages, entrusted to the Google AdSense network. Ads only load after your choice in the consent banner. This is currently the site's only source of revenue.
This funding has no hold on what gets written. Concretely:
- No sponsored content. No article, test or video is commissioned, reviewed, approved or funded by a brand, a pharmaceutical company, a supplement manufacturer or a clinic.
- No affiliate links. The site earns nothing if you buy a product mentioned here. We sell no product, no supplement, no consultation.
- No influence on the choice of topics. Topics come from the questions our readers send in and from the scientific literature, never from an advertising budget.
- No health data passed to advertisers. Answers to the tests and the game never leave that setting; the details are in our privacy policy.
- Visible separation. Ad slots are distinct from the text and are never presented as editorial content.
- Any partnership would be disclosed. If a piece of content were ever produced in partnership, it would be announced as such at the top of the article, before the text.
The legal details are on the legal notice page.
Who writes, and the limits of our work
Content is designed, documented and reviewed by Bouchra Jabri, founder, editorial lead and publishing director. She writes alone and alone takes responsibility for what is published. Our work is documentary and educational: we make research accessible, we do not produce medical advice. No VivanaFem content replaces a consultation. For any decision about your health, talk to your doctor.
What we are not. Bouchra Jabri is not a physician, and VivanaFem does not present itself as a medical authority. The site's content is not, to date, reviewed by a health professional before publication. We say it rather than let it be assumed, because it tells you exactly what weight to give what you read here: that of a careful, documented reading of the scientific literature, not that of a clinical opinion. That is also why the references are displayed: you can go back to the source, and so can your doctor.
What we do instead of a medical review
Not having a medical reviewer does not exempt us from verifying. Since August 26, 2026, articles on the most sensitive topics have been checked, line by line, against the recommendations of learned societies: the French texts first (GEMVi, CNGOF, HAS, ANSM, ANSES, GRIO), then the international positions (The Menopause Society, ESC, EFSA).
Each of these articles carries, at the bottom of the page, a box stating which texts it was checked against, and on what date, with a link to each official document. When a claim diverged from a recommendation, it was corrected or removed. When a recommendation requires a safeguard the article left unmentioned (a contraindication, a warning sign, a group of women to exclude), it was added.
What this process is not. It does not amount to review by a professional. None of these institutions has read, validated or approved our articles, and we write nothing to the contrary: we write “checked against”, never “validated by”. The difference matters, and you can verify it yourself: all the documents cited are public and linked.
What we do not publish
- No diagnosis, no personalized dosage, no treatment recommendation addressed to any individual reader.
- No claim that is not tied to an identifiable source, even if it circulates everywhere else.
- No content built on an isolated testimonial presented as proof.
- No promise of results, no protocol presented as valid for everyone.
- No content produced by automated generation and published without human verification of the sources: every reference is checked before going online.
The place of lived experience
Bouchra is herself in perimenopause. That experience has one precise place in our method, and only one: it guides the choice of topics and the way the questions are asked, by showing why a given symptom deserves an article, which confusion keeps coming back, which word is missing in French. It explains why the site talks about brain fog, the difficulty of losing weight, fatigue and joint pain rather than something else.
It never grounds a claim. Not one sentence on this site rests on a personal feeling: each one points to a study cited at the bottom of the page. An individual experience is not proof, and what is true for one woman is not true for the next. That is why the two things are kept separate here, and why we say so explicitly. The full story is on the about page.