Editorial Standards
Transparency in how we research, verify, and publish. Every piece of content on Cassandra Research is held to institutional-grade standards of accuracy and traceability.
Our Editorial Principles
These six principles govern every piece of content we publish across our Tax, Legal, Medical, and AI knowledge bases.
Primary Source Only
All content is sourced from primary legislation (ITAA 1997, ITAA 1936, GST Act 1999), official ATO rulings and determinations, court records from the High Court, Federal Court, and AAT, and peer-reviewed medical and AI research. We never cite secondary blogs, forums, or AI-generated summaries as sources.
Expert Review Process
Every piece of published content undergoes review by qualified professionals: Australian tax agents registered with the Tax Practitioners Board (TPB), chartered accountants (CA/CPA), and practicing lawyers. Medical content is reviewed against authoritative clinical sources including the Cochrane Library.
Citation & Traceability
Every factual claim, legal interpretation, and recommendation includes traceable citations — statute references, ATO ruling numbers, case law citations (e.g. [2024] HCA 12), or journal DOIs. If a claim cannot be cited to a primary source, it is not published.
Currency & Continuous Updates
Content is systematically reviewed and updated when the ATO releases new rulings, Parliament amends legislation, courts hand down new decisions, or regulatory frameworks change. Every knowledge page displays a 'Last reviewed' date so users know exactly how current the information is.
Corrections & Transparency
If we identify an error in published content, we issue a correction immediately with a clear note explaining what changed and why. We do not silently edit published material. Users can report potential inaccuracies to service@cassandraresearch.com.
Editorial Independence
Our research and content are editorially independent. No client, partner, or commercial relationship influences the accuracy or presentation of our published analysis. Our obligation is to the truth of the law and the integrity of the research.
Our Review Process
Every piece of content passes through a four-stage review pipeline before publication.
Research & Drafting
Content is drafted by domain specialists using primary source materials — legislation, court judgments, official regulatory publications.
Fact-Check & Citation Audit
Every factual claim is verified against the cited source. Citations are checked for accuracy, currency, and correct formatting.
Expert Review
A qualified professional in the relevant domain reviews the content for accuracy, completeness, and compliance with professional standards.
Publication & Monitoring
Content is published with metadata (author division, publication date, last reviewed date) and enters our monitoring pipeline for ongoing currency.
Who Reviews Our Content
Tax Division
- Registered Tax Agents (Tax Practitioners Board)
- Chartered Accountants (CPA Australia / CA ANZ)
- ATO-experienced practitioners
Legal Division
- Practicing lawyers admitted to Australian courts
- Legal researchers with LLB/JD qualifications
- Specialists in statutory interpretation
AI & Medical Division
- AI researchers with peer-reviewed publications
- Medical content reviewed against Cochrane Library
- NIST AI RMF and ISO 42001 framework specialists
Report an Issue or Suggest a Correction
We take accuracy seriously. If you believe any content on our platform contains an error or needs updating, please contact us. All reports are reviewed within 48 hours.