Editorial & Corrections Policy

Our goal is to make official U.S. FDA recall information faster to find and easier to understand — accurately, without sensationalism, and without giving medical advice.

Every recall on RecallWatch originates from the U.S. FDA’s public openFDA data — the device enforcement reports, enriched with the FDA’s recall (RES) and device classification datasets. We do not invent facts; severity class, status, dates, and the recalling firm’s stated reason and action come directly from the FDA record.

Recall data is normalized and de-duplicated by its FDA recall number. Plain-language headlines and summaries are derived from the official recall reason. Before an item is featured editorially, our analyst checks it against the FDA’s official record. Each recall links back to FDA.gov so readers can confirm the source.

We use automated ingestion to pull recalls from openFDA and to format them consistently. Automation never changes the substance of the FDA’s findings. Editorial analysis and commentary are authored and reviewed by a named human analyst.

Recall coverage is bylined and reviewed by a named analyst, so readers know who stands behind it.

Taylor Coteus

Legal News Analyst

Taylor Coteus is RecallWatch's Legal News Analyst, covering FDA medical-device enforcement and patient-safety litigation. He reviews every recall against the FDA's official openFDA record before it is published and is responsible for corrections and editorial accuracy.

We correct errors promptly and transparently. If you believe something is inaccurate or out of date, email corrections@recallwatch.example or use our contact page. We review reported errors against the FDA record and update the affected page; significant corrections are noted on the page.

RecallWatch is editorially independent and not affiliated with the U.S. FDA or any manufacturer. We do not accept payment to publish, alter, or remove recall coverage.