- Details
- Written by: Bryce McMurray
AI in medical writing
The use of AI in medical communications has been an area of active discussion in the industry during the last two years. The period has been characterised by extensive investigation of how the technology can drive efficiency in content creation. Whilst the area has spawned multiple start-up companies and corporate initiatives, full scale rollouts are still uncommon. Whilst AI looks set to improve productivity, the need for human oversight is universally acknowledged across the board.
Differing approaches for different outputs
At Springer Health+ we have been closely following the use and potential of generative AI to enhance the work of our medical writers. In 2023 we successfully developed a process for article summarisation which allowed us to deliver a variety of summary formats including Plain Language Summaries (PLS). Subsequently to that we have looked at the use of GenAI to create a draft or outline from a clinical study report (CSR). This has shown some promise, though there are also a number of hurdles to overcome to make the technology more generally applicable in this area. When given the right prompts by the medical writer, we found that the system could pick up study endpoints and produce accurate narrative however it became clear that different therapy areas and study types required adaptation. Once more, the need to ensure an accurate and ethical approach is the responsibility of the writer overseeing the process.
Balancing data and narrative
Whilst a CSR is a potential starting point for the AI, a more useful approach would be able to generate descriptive content from the starting point of data tables. This aspect of the use of AI in medical writing follows on from the fact that numerical doesn't follow narrative patterns. A table isn't a narrative story, it’s a map of relations where correlations can be more important than sequences. This presents the possibility that other forms of AI based around mathematical reasoning may be more suitable for creating initial interpretations of data sets with LLMs fulfilling a downstream role in creating a full narrative. As the field matures, we are likely to see a range of different approaches and techniques emerge to tackle different scenarios. Subject matter experts will ultimately drive the choice of specific technologies and external independent review will always be required prior to publication. Moreover, AI assistance must always be disclosed to authors and readers.
We are continuing to evaluate the use of all aspects of AI in medical communications and publication, and are working closely with the wider AI and ethics teams group at Springer Nature to explore the application of AI across scientific research within Springer Nature’s AI governance principles. As we explore deeper into the research process, we will quite possibly find areas where LLMs may need to be supplemented by other AI approaches. As with all our work in this field, the guiding principles of ethics and sustainability will always be paramount.
Bryce McMurray
VP Scientific, Medical Communications and Education
- Details
- Written by: Caroline Halford
Patient voices takes center stage at the 18th annual European CME Forum
I recently attended the 18th Annual European CME Forum (ECF18), held in Manchester (aka my home town, and the best city in my opinion). One of my favourite sessions was hosted by Sarah Nisly (Clinical Education Alliance) and Kathryn Burn (Smart Patients), titled “Enhancing Continuing Professional Development Through Patient Voices”.
Sarah and Kathryn did a great job in addressing the practical and strategic dimensions of involving patients in CME using a mixture of best-practice theory and real-life examples. This discussion emphasized how patient narratives and lived experiences can drive positive behavior change among healthcare professionals. There are many examples of how this can be done in an impactful way, for example:
- The patient lived experience can help to identify suboptimal healthcare practices
- Patient insights can identify discrepancies between their perceptions of ‘best patient care’ vs HCP assumptions about the same
- Patient voices can enhance HCP empathy, increase awareness of patient concerns, and improve clinical decision-making
Many studies have demonstrated the real-life impact of patient voices within CME programs, such as:
- HCP impact: Increased empathy, increased knowledge retention, and better clinical practice
- Patient impact: Increased therapy adherence and shared decision-making
- Cultural impact: Fosters understanding between all HC stakeholders
Throughout the session, we examined key implementation questions, including how to identify and recruit effective patient educators; how to structure their involvement in program design including orientation and preparation; how to truly partner with patients and co-design programs that meet their needs; how to deliver the program with them and support them along the way, and how to measure impact beyond traditional satisfaction metrics.
Two resources discussed that I will definitely be looking into more are:
- Smart Patients – an online community for patients and their families : https://www.smartpatients.com/
- The ACCME Patient-Provider Roadmap: https://accme.org/resource/patient-engagement-resources/
As the CME community continues to evolve, ECF18 made clear that patient engagement is not just a trend—it’s a transformative strategy for meaningful, measurable learning.