Scientific Integrity

Evidence-Based Content Development

IAS Courses content derives from systematic review of peer-reviewed literature, international clinical guidelines, and implementation science research. Our development process prioritizes scientific rigor, evidence quality, and practical applicability.

Review Process

All course content undergoes multi-stage review including technical accuracy verification by subject matter experts, clinical relevance assessment by practicing healthcare professionals, and editorial review for clarity and accessibility. Content is updated when new evidence emerges that materially affects recommendations.

Conflict of Interest Management

Content contributors and reviewers disclose potential conflicts of interest. Financial relationships with pharmaceutical companies, device manufacturers, or other commercial entities are evaluated for potential bias. Contributors with significant conflicts are excluded from content development in relevant areas.

Funding Transparency

IAS Courses operational funding derives from philanthropic sources and institutional support to the International AIDS Society. We do not accept funding from pharmaceutical companies or device manufacturers for content development. All funding sources are disclosed on our funding transparency page.

Editorial Independence

Content development and review processes maintain independence from funding sources and organizational stakeholders. Editorial decisions prioritize scientific evidence and educational value rather than commercial interests or institutional preferences.

Evidence Quality Assessment

Evidence is evaluated using established quality assessment frameworks. Course content distinguishes between high-quality evidence from randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews versus lower-quality evidence from observational studies or expert opinion. Strength of recommendations reflects underlying evidence quality.

Guideline Alignment

Content aligns with WHO HIV treatment guidelines and UNAIDS policy guidance while acknowledging areas of ongoing debate or evidence uncertainty. When international guidelines differ from some national approaches, we present the evidence basis for different positions without advocating for specific policies.

Last updated: January 2026