How We Use AI (Our Review Process)

Clinical Web Archive utilizes artificial intelligence as an editorial assistant, not as an autonomous publisher.

• The Role of AI: We use advanced language models (e.g., Gemini) to parse complex scientific abstracts and draft the initial concise summaries based on our strict structural template.
• Human Oversight: Every draft is reviewed, fact-checked, and approved by a human editor before distribution.
• Source Primacy: The AI is instructed to adhere strictly to the information presented in the original PubMed abstract/article. It is not permitted to hallucinate data, infer conclusions not present in the text, or pull external unverified information into the summary.

Maintaining the integrity of our archive requires rigorous quality assurance and a transparent corrections process.

• The Review Process: Before any summary is added to the database or sent in a newsletter, a reviewer verifies that the AI draft accurately reflects the source material, includes the necessary limitations, and is assigned the correct specialty tags.
• Corrections & Updates: If an error is identified in our summary (e.g., inaccurate statistics, misinterpretation of the conclusion), we will promptly correct the database entry. For significant errors that may impact clinical understanding, we will issue a correction notice in the subsequent relevant specialty newsletter.
• Retracted Papers: If an original paper summarized by our service is later retracted by the publishing journal, we will remove the summary from our archive or explicitly mark it as retracted.