Review Integrity Policy

Authenticity, Verification, Solicitation, Moderation, Ratings and Anti-Manipulation Rules

1. Purpose and Integrity Commitments

Reviews can materially affect healthcare decisions. GetClinic therefore treats review integrity as a marketplace-trust function, not as a marketing benefit sold to Clinics. GetClinic aims to present a fair and useful picture of genuine Patient experience while protecting privacy, safety, lawful expression and procedural fairness.

Genuine, relevant and lawful positive and negative reviews are subject to the same core eligibility and integrity standards.

A Clinic’s commercial plan, sponsorship, advertising spend, payment status or relationship with GetClinic does not buy a better rating, favorable moderation or removal of lawful criticism.

Verification labels state only what GetClinic has actually verified; they do not imply medical endorsement, clinical-quality certification or truth of every subjective statement.

GetClinic may use reasonable and proportionate technical and human measures to prevent, detect and remove fake, manipulated or misleading reviews.

Review moderation and Clinic compliance/safety investigation are separate decisions: a serious Patient allegation may be escalated for safety review without being removed merely because it is serious.

GetClinic will not represent that all reviews are verified unless the product actually enforces that standard.

Commercial independence. Sponsored placement or commercial terms may affect clearly labeled advertising surfaces, but must not alter a Patient’s review text, review-moderation outcome, verification label or aggregate rating merely because the Clinic paid GetClinic.

2. Who May Submit a Review

GetClinic may allow a registered Patient to review a Clinic after a qualifying marketplace interaction, including an inquiry, consultation, Booking or Treatment-related journey. The product may limit review eligibility by interaction type, time window, account status, abuse signals or other neutral integrity criteria.

A person must review their own genuine experience and must not impersonate another Patient.

Clinic owners, employees, physicians, contractors, agencies, affiliates, competitors or other materially conflicted persons must not pose as independent Patients.

Where GetClinic permits a review from a person with a material connection, the connection must be disclosed and GetClinic may exclude the review from aggregate scoring or apply a visible label.

A Patient may not sell, transfer or lend review eligibility to another person.

GetClinic may refuse duplicate reviews for the same interaction where multiple reviews would distort the overall picture, while still allowing a later update or materially distinct qualifying interaction under product rules.

3. Verification Labels and What They Mean

No label inflation. A weaker evidence state cannot be presented as a stronger one. In particular, a Booking alone must not become “Verified Treatment,” and Clinic confirmation alone is not sufficient where GetClinic’s label implies independent platform verification.

4. How GetClinic Collects, Checks and Presents Reviews

GetClinic may use a combination of the following integrity controls, applied proportionately to risk and product design:

• registered-account and interaction eligibility checks;
• Booking, consultation, payment or other marketplace-record matching where relevant to a verification label;
• duplicate, device, account, behavioral, velocity or coordination signals designed to detect manipulation or fraud;
• text/content screening for spam, impersonation, privacy risk, unlawful content or other policy violations;
• human review where automated signals, reports, legal issues, health-data concerns or context require judgment;

post-publication monitoring, Clinic/Patient reports and pattern analysis; and

rating-integrity controls that exclude reviews reasonably determined to be fraudulent, duplicate, conflicted or otherwise ineligible.

GetClinic may publish a genuine review without a verification label where product rules allow. Where GetClinic claims that a review is verified or originates from a Patient with a particular verified interaction, GetClinic must take reasonable and proportionate steps appropriate to that claim.

Transparency at the review surface. The review interface should make available a clear explanation, or a clearly identified link to an explanation, of review eligibility, verification labels, material moderation rules and the basic approach to aggregate ratings so users are not misled about how reviews are sourced or checked.

5. Fake, False and Manipulated Reviews Are Prohibited

creating, buying, selling, brokering, commissioning or procuring a review by a person who does not exist or did not have the represented experience;

using AI, automation, agencies, reputation-management services or other third parties to fabricate Patient reviews or materially misrepresent a real Patient’s experience;

Clinic personnel or agents posting undisclosed reviews of their own Clinic or negative reviews of another Clinic while posing as Patients;

review rings, reciprocal review arrangements, coordinated account networks or other schemes designed to inflate or depress ratings;

recycling a genuine review from one Clinic, facility, physician, procedure or Patient interaction as though it related to another;

materially changing the sentiment or substantive meaning of a Patient review without the reviewer’s authorization;

using a Patient’s identity, name, image or account to submit a review the Patient did not provide; or

knowingly providing false verification evidence to obtain a stronger review label.

Third-party responsibility. A Clinic may be held responsible under the MSA for prohibited review-manipulation conduct carried out by an agency, affiliate, SEO/reputation vendor or other person acting on Clinic’s instruction, authorization or knowing benefit, subject to the MSA and applicable law.

6. Incentives, Compensation and Material Connections

Default GetClinic rule. A Clinic must not offer money, refunds, discounts, gifts, priority treatment, aftercare benefits or other consideration in exchange for a GetClinic review unless the arrangement is part of a GetClinic-approved, legally cleared, sentiment-neutral feedback program. Any approved incentive must not depend expressly or implicitly on a positive or negative sentiment and must be disclosed where required.

A Clinic must never offer an incentive conditioned on a five-star, positive or otherwise favorable review.

A Clinic must never pay or reward a Patient to remove, soften or materially change truthful negative feedback where doing so would distort the review picture or violate law.

Free or discounted Treatment, employment, ownership, family connection, affiliate compensation or another material relationship must be disclosed where it could affect credibility.

GetClinic may label, exclude from aggregate ratings, restrict or remove a review where an undisclosed material connection undermines review integrity.

7. Review Solicitation and Anti-Gating Rules

Neutral solicitation. Where Clinic solicits GetClinic reviews, the request must not be conditioned on satisfaction or phrased in a way that communicates that only positive feedback is wanted.

Do not ask a Patient privately whether they are satisfied and send the GetClinic review invitation only to Patients who answer positively where that process would materially distort the review sample.

Do not route dissatisfied Patients only to a private complaint form while routing satisfied Patients to a public review form as a way to suppress negative public feedback.

Do not delay a review invitation until a Patient changes a complaint outcome or withdraws criticism.

Do not instruct staff or agencies to solicit only from Patients selected because they are expected to provide favorable reviews, where the selection would materially misrepresent overall feedback.

A Clinic may contact a dissatisfied Patient to resolve a problem, but resolution must not be conditioned on removing or changing a lawful review.

8. Review Content Rules

A review may be restricted or removed if it contains or materially depends on:

• a fabricated experience, impersonation or knowingly false verification representation;
• unlawful threats, harassment or content that unlawfully targets a person;
• another person’s Health Data, identity document, contact information or other sensitive personal data without authority;
• payment-card data, passwords, authentication credentials or other security-sensitive information;
• spam, unrelated solicitation, undisclosed advertising or affiliate promotion presented as independent Patient opinion;
• copyrighted or other third-party material the reviewer has no right to use;
• materially AI-generated or altered content falsely presented as the reviewer’s genuine account;

content subject to a binding court/regulatory order or other legal removal obligation; or

another violation of the Patient Terms, this Policy, the DSA/content-moderation policy or applicable law.

Opinion versus factual dispute. GetClinic does not remove a review merely because a Clinic disagrees with a Patient’s opinion, dissatisfaction, perceived bedside manner, communication experience or subjective outcome assessment. Where a report identifies a concrete factual assertion as materially false, GetClinic may consider relevant evidence without turning the review process into a medical-malpractice adjudication.

9. Clinic Responses, Medical Confidentiality and Privacy

A Clinic response must remain professional and must not retaliate, threaten or harass the reviewer.

Clinic must not disclose diagnosis, medical history, Treatment records, images, messages, payment details or other Patient confidential information merely to rebut criticism.

Clinic must not confirm that a reviewer is a Patient if doing so would itself unlawfully disclose healthcare information.

Clinic may state that privacy rules limit its ability to discuss individual circumstances publicly, but must not use that limitation to make a misleading factual counterclaim.

Evidence needed to challenge a review must be submitted through the designated secure dispute route; Clinic should provide the minimum necessary evidence and must not publicly upload medical records.

GetClinic may redact or restrict review/response content to protect another person’s privacy while preserving legitimate substance where reasonably possible.

10. Reporting a Review and Evidence Standards

Right to report, not right to remove. A Clinic or Patient may report a review believed to violate this Policy. A report does not create automatic removal, and negative sentiment alone is not a policy violation.

11. Moderation Status and Operational Effect

No deemed moderation outcome. Passage of time, an unanswered report, an automated flag, a Clinic account status or a support message does not by itself change a review status.

12. Editing, Translation, Summaries and AI

Where product functionality allows a reviewer to edit a review, GetClinic may retain prior versions or an audit record for fraud, dispute and compliance purposes.

GetClinic must not materially rewrite a Patient’s substantive opinion to make it more favorable or unfavorable to Clinic.

Grammar, formatting, profanity masking, de-identification or other limited moderation edits must not materially alter meaning.

Machine or human translation may be provided for accessibility. Where a translation could affect meaning, GetClinic should retain the original and may label the translation.

An AI-generated summary of reviews must not be presented as a direct Patient quote and should be designed not to distort the overall balance of eligible reviews.

AI or automated tooling may assist abuse detection or moderation triage, but a successful third-party API result or automated score is not itself proof that a review is genuine.

13. Aggregate Ratings, Sorting and Presentation

Aggregate ratings should be calculated from eligible reviews under the then-current disclosed methodology and must not count reviews known to be fake, duplicate or otherwise ineligible.

Sponsored status, advertising spend or a paid Clinic plan must not directly increase the Clinic’s review score.

If GetClinic materially weights reviews by recency, verification state, interaction type or another factor, the review interface or policy should disclose enough about that approach to avoid misleading users.

A verified label may affect how a review is filtered or presented, but GetClinic must not imply that an unverified review is false merely because it lacks a verification label.

Sorting controls such as most recent, most relevant, highest or lowest rating should be labeled accurately.

GetClinic must not manipulate default sorting or selective publication with the purpose or effect of concealing a material body of genuine negative feedback.

14. Imported, Syndicated and External Reviews

If GetClinic displays reviews sourced from another platform, Clinic, provider or syndication partner, the source should be clearly identified where necessary to avoid misleading users. External reviews must not be presented as native GetClinic verified reviews unless GetClinic independently satisfies the applicable verification standard.

Do not transfer a review from one Clinic/facility/procedure to another merely because the businesses are affiliated or similarly named.

Do not merge external ratings into a GetClinic aggregate score unless the methodology and source treatment are designed and disclosed so the combined score is not misleading.

If a source later retracts or materially corrects an external review, GetClinic may update or remove the mirrored content accordingly.

15. Non-Retaliation, Review Suppression and Legal Threats

Clinic must not condition Treatment, medically necessary aftercare, refund processing, complaint handling or another Patient entitlement on deleting, changing or withholding a lawful review.

Clinic must not threaten, intimidate, harass or retaliate against a Patient for a lawful negative review.

Clinic must not use a form contract, policy or standard confidentiality/non-disparagement term whose purpose or unlawful effect is to prevent Patients from giving honest reviews.

Nothing in this Policy prevents a person from asserting a legitimate legal right or reporting genuinely unlawful content. However, unfounded or groundless legal threats must not be used to suppress a review or deter lawful feedback.

GetClinic may treat evidence of systematic review suppression as a marketplace-integrity issue separate from the merits of any single review.

16. Promotional Reuse of Reviews and Testimonials

Public review ≠ marketing authorization. Clinic must not assume that a Patient’s public review authorizes Clinic to reuse the Patient’s name, review, photograph, Health Data or Treatment outcome in paid advertising, social-media promotion, before/after marketing or other promotional material. Any such reuse is separately governed by applicable consent/privacy law and, for an incorporated Clinic, the Clinic Consent, Marketing & Advertising Policy.

Quoting reviews. Where Clinic is lawfully permitted to quote a review in marketing, it must not materially alter the meaning, omit context in a misleading way, fabricate a rating, or imply that GetClinic endorses the Clinic because the review appeared on GetClinic.

17. Complaints, Appeals and DSA / Mandatory Redress

Patients and Clinics may use the applicable GetClinic reporting/complaint route to challenge a review-moderation decision. Where the EU Digital Services Act or other mandatory law applies, GetClinic will provide the required statement of reasons, internal complaint or other applicable redress route in accordance with the DSA / Content Moderation & Illegal Content Reporting Policy and applicable law.

Appeal review should consider the original content, moderation reason, relevant verification evidence, later evidence and the proportionality of the action. A Clinic’s commercial relationship with GetClinic must not determine an appeal outcome.

18. Records, Privacy and Retention

GetClinic may retain review text, rating, eligibility/verification references, fraud/moderation signals, Clinic/Patient reports, evidence references, decision records, appeal records and audit history for as long as reasonably necessary for publication, integrity, fraud prevention, disputes, legal compliance and enforcement under the applicable retention framework.

Review-verification evidence should be minimized to what is reasonably necessary for the label or integrity decision.

A Clinic challenging a review should not submit a full medical record where narrower evidence can resolve the issue.

Internal abuse signals, fraud thresholds and risk-model details need not be disclosed where disclosure would enable circumvention, subject to mandatory transparency/redress requirements.

Review information and health-related content remain subject to GetClinic’s applicable privacy policies and, where relevant, the Clinic DPSA allocation.

19. Versioning, Incorporation and Transition

Patient effect. For Patients, this Policy is the Review Policy referenced in Patient Marketplace Terms of Service Sections 59 and 59A and is governed by the Patient Terms’ applicable publication/update framework.

Clinic effect. For Clinics, this Policy binds only after the exact policy name and version - “Review Integrity Policy - v1.0” - is recorded in the accepted Incorporated GetClinic Policies field or another valid incorporation instrument. Blank, omitted, NONE or a different policy name/version does not incorporate this version.

Supersession. This Policy supersedes GetClinic Review Policy v1.0 for future publication and new Clinic incorporation. A Clinic already bound to a prior policy version remains on that version until the MSA’s applicable update/incorporation mechanism validly transitions it; no silent replacement is permitted.

Version identity. Each published version must identify one exact rendered text. If the delivered text changes, GetClinic issues a new version rather than reusing the existing version string.

Implementation transparency. GetClinic may maintain internal review-integrity procedures, evidence records, abuse-detection controls and reviewer playbooks that are not published where disclosure would enable circumvention. Those internal materials cannot silently expand Patient or Clinic obligations beyond the applicable Terms, MSA, this Policy and mandatory law.

Regulatory alignment. This Policy is designed to support, among other applicable requirements, rules addressing fake or false reviews, sentiment-conditioned incentives, undisclosed material connections, review suppression, and transparency about whether/how consumer reviews are verified or processed. Applicable obligations differ by jurisdiction and may change. This Annex is not a legal opinion or substitute for jurisdiction-specific review.