Editorial standards

The core monograph, evidence table, and claim manifest are produced from primary FDA, DailyMed, WHO, PubMed, and Europe PMC sources. Dapsone's topical and oral routes are kept distinct, and core claims are graded by evidence type. No named physician or clinician has reviewed this site, and we do not claim medical review. The generated guide archive and interactive tools have not completed the standard required for high-risk medical publication; they are visibly labeled, set noindex, and excluded from sitemaps and AI citation files until individually reviewed and approved.

Claims about dapsone may cite only: peer-reviewed journals indexed in PubMed or Europe PMC; FDA sources (approved labels current and historical, Drugs@FDA, openFDA, eCFR); and intergovernmental health bodies (WHO). Label facts are stated as label facts with the label version identified; the 2005-vs-2008 G6PD labeling change is cited to both archived label PDFs. Case reports are graded as case reports, guideline consensus as consensus, and the absence of trials (no DH efficacy RCT, no head-to-head acne trials) is cited to archived search records rather than asserted casually. Commercial skincare content, retail sites and forums are never citable sources.

Every page displays its published and last-updated dates. This reference is re-reviewed when any of the following move: a dapsone label revision (either route), a new randomized acne trial, a change to the AAD acne guideline or EADV dermatitis herpetiformis guideline, a WHO leprosy program change, or an FDA safety communication. The evidence-limits block changes in the same commit as the evidence that closes it.

If you find an error, use the contact link in the site footer. Corrections are assessed against primary sources; anything that fails verification is fixed on the page and noted with the correction date. We treat a wrong number as a defect, not a difference of opinion.