The nine criteria every feature must pass.
A member may describe their philosophy of care, techniques, training, community work, and what a first visit involves — and may not claim cures, guarantees, superiority, or outcomes. Every submission is reviewed against these nine criteria, in order, within 3–5 business days. Criteria 1–5 are compliance gates: a miss requires revision before anything else is considered. Criteria 6–7 are professional standards. Criteria 8–9 are the quality bar that makes the magazine worth being in.
Revision requests cite criterion numbers, so authors always know exactly what to fix. Two revision rounds are included. A submission that cannot clear review after two rounds triggers the published-or-refunded promise: membership cancelled, payment refunded in full, and the door left open for a fresh draft.
Compliance gates
No cure claims or guaranteed outcomes
The article may never state or imply that chiropractic care cures, heals, treats, reverses, or prevents any medical condition or disease — including pain conditions framed as diagnoses, and especially conditions outside musculoskeletal scope (cancer, diabetes, infections, allergies, autism, infertility). The same gate covers promised results: no recovery timelines, visit counts tied to outcomes, success percentages, or the words “permanent” or “guaranteed” applied to any result.
“Adjustments heal sciatica,” “chiropractic treats migraines,” “we can reverse arthritis,” “pain-free in three visits,” “95% of my patients improve,” “lasting relief, guaranteed,” or any implied version (“patients walk in with X and leave without it”).
Describing what care aims at and what patients commonly report: “My goal is to restore comfortable movement,” “many patients tell me their sleep improved during care,” “every spine is different, so we reassess at every visit.”
Inclusive, accepting, unifying — and dignified
The article presents care as being for everyone. Write so that patients of every background, body, age, culture, and belief can see themselves in the practice — language of acceptance and welcome, never assumptions about who the reader is. The same spirit rules the profession’s own house: no tribalism between techniques, philosophies, or generations of chiropractors, and no us-versus-them framing toward the wider healthcare world. And the tone stays worthy of the mark: no profanity or crude humor, no sexual content, no violent or graphic imagery (injuries and accidents are discussed clinically), and nothing that demeans any group by race, sex, religion, orientation, disability, body size, age, or politics — including “jokes.”
Language that excludes or others any group, assumes one kind of reader, splits the profession into camps (“real chiropractors do X”), frames chiropractic against medicine, any curse word or off-color humor, shock-value injury description, or stereotype-based content of any kind.
“Every body that comes through my door gets the same care and the same respect — every age, every background, every story.”
No patient data or identifying information
No patient names, photos, initials, ages combined with conditions, occupations combined with neighborhoods, or any detail that could let a reader recognize a real patient — even in praise. De-identified patient stories are allowed only with signed written consent on file with Chiro+ before publication.
Any recognizable patient, any photo with a patient in it, any story specific enough that the patient could recognize themselves without consent on file.
“A patient in her sixties once asked me…” with consent on file, or fully general statements about what patients commonly experience.
Stay in scope of practice
No advice to start, stop, or avoid medications, vaccines, or medical treatment; no diagnosing the reader; no positioning chiropractic as a replacement for medical care. Red-flag symptoms mentioned in the article must point the reader to a medical provider.
“Before you reach for pills…,” “skip the surgery consult,” anti-vaccination content, or “if you feel numbness down your arm, come see me” (red flags route to medical care, not to the practice).
“Chiropractic works alongside your physician’s care” and “sudden weakness or numbness deserves a medical evaluation first.”
Editorial, never advertising
The feature educates; it does not sell or rank. No prices, discounts, packages, promotions, or urgency pressure — the practice may be mentioned naturally, and the profile’s booking button does the selling. The author also may not promote by comparison: no “best,” “#1,” “top-rated,” or “leading,” and no criticizing, naming, or disparaging other clinics, chiropractors, or professions. Defamation risk and state-board advertising trouble both live in this criterion.
“New-patient special,” “mention this article for 20% off,” “call today — spots are limited,” listed prices, “Austin’s best chiropractor,” “unlike the clinic down the road,” naming any competitor.
“Here’s how I approach it differently” — differentiation by philosophy, never by comparison or price.
Professional standards
Honest credentials, honest evidence
Degrees, licensure, certifications, techniques, and years in practice must be accurate and verifiable — they are checked against the credential records behind every profile. No invented titles, honorary inflation, expired certifications presented as current, or “specialist” claims where the state restricts that word. Any study, statistic, or research reference must be real, cited accurately, and fairly characterized; the author’s care philosophy is welcome as philosophy — it may not be dressed up as settled science.
Any credential the verification team cannot confirm, fabricated or unverifiable citations, real studies stretched past their findings, “research proves” attached to opinion.
“In my fifteen years of practice, I’ve come to believe…” — owned opinion, clearly framed.
Your words, your work
The article is the author’s own: not published anywhere else, not copied or spun from other sites or another member’s feature (submissions are plagiarism-checked). Drafting help — including AI assistance — is fine, but the author must have reviewed every line and own every claim, because criteria 1–6 apply to them personally. Other people’s words stay out too: no quoted or attributed patient testimonials in the body — praise belongs on review platforms, because testimonials inside Chiro+ editorial trigger FTC endorsement rules and state advertising restrictions. General, honest, non-identifying statements about what patients commonly report are fine.
Copied or duplicate content, an AI draft submitted unread, “‘Dr. Smith changed my life!’ — Sarah T.” or paraphrased praise attributed to a specific patient.
“Patients often tell me the first thing they notice is how thoroughly we listen.”
The quality bar
Written for the reader, with substance
The piece is 600–1,200 words, written for patients rather than peers: plain language (jargon explained in the same sentence it appears), a headline that makes a promise the article keeps, and short sections that each carry one idea. And it must leave the reader with something they can use — what a first visit actually involves, how the doctor thinks about care decisions, everyday habits that affect the spine, when a symptom deserves a medical evaluation. Filler that could appear in any wellness pamphlet gets revised.
Anatomy-textbook jargon walls, a headline the body never delivers, 300 or 2,500 words, “wellness is a journey” sentences that teach nothing.
The doctor’s real voice
First person, specific to this practice and this philosophy. The test the editor applies: could any chiropractor in America have written this paragraph? If yes, it needs the author’s specifics — how they came to practice, what they do differently, what a patient will notice in their office.
Generic third-person copy that reads like a template with a name merged in.