Read this email in your browser.
Hi Reader,
I'm sure you've already had this experience (we talk about it a lot in WriteCME Pro). Your client sends you an email: “Quick question — did you use any AI tools on this draft?” Yeah, you did, in a few places. You start to type a reply, and realize you couldn’t fully reconstruct where, or how, or what you checked after the fact.
This gap between using the tools and being able to account for using them is nearly universal right now. This isn't as much an ethics problem as it is a documentation problem. In my experience, most writers are careful, although several education providers tell me they have worked with writers who use AI and clearly don't check their work. Yikes!
Although the CME field is becoming ever more comfortable with using AI, and ACCME guidelines now exist, in truth, we're still improvising. Few of us (with the exception of the excellent Núria Negrão) seem to really have a clean answer about how to represent your approach to and use of AI. The Write Medicine blog also covers tips on how to talk to your client about AI.
But disclosure expectations are accelerating, so here's something to explore. Keep a two-line AI-use note on every project you do this coming quarter, including:
- The tool you used, and the version you used
- What you used an AI tool for, and
- What you verified independently.
This experiment costs seconds and turns a future disclosure request from a scramble into a copy-paste or checklist process.
I've learned that being the writer who can already speak plainly about process is not just about compliance. It's a positioning advantage.
Warmly,
P.S. If you’d like ready-made wording for client conversations, the CME Client Engagement Kit → has checklists, templates, and client-facing language to save you hours planning, tracking, and pricing projects.