Why medical review matters
Medical education content directly affects how future doctors diagnose and treat patients. An incorrect mnemonic or outdated guideline recommendation can cost lives. At CrackCMS, every clinical statement is reviewed by qualified clinicians before publication and re-audited on a rolling cadence.
Reviewer Qualifications
- All clinical reviewers hold an MBBS plus MD/MS in the relevant subject.
- Senior reviewers have a minimum of 5 years post-PG clinical or teaching experience.
- External subject-matter experts (e.g. pediatric cardiologists) review niche content.
Review Workflow
- Drafting — author (clinician or AI) writes the explanation.
- Fact-check — clinical reviewer cross-references with at least one Tier-1 textbook.
- Style review — editorial lead ensures learner-friendly phrasing.
- Final sign-off — chief medical officer approves for publication.
- Quarterly re-audit — random 10% sample re-reviewed for currency.
AI Output Audits
We sample 200+ AI tutor responses per week across all specialties. Each sample is scored on a 5-point rubric covering accuracy, citation, safety, and clarity. Any response scoring below 4.0 is escalated for human review.
Red-Team Testing
A dedicated prompt set simulates adversarial questions (drug dosages, contraindications, emergency protocols) to test whether the AI tutor produces unsafe recommendations. Failed prompts trigger immediate model-prompt adjustments.
Disclosure of AI Involvement
Every explanation card carries a small "AI-assisted" or "Clinician-authored" badge so learners know the source. The full review trail is available to administrators on the Admin → Question Review page.
Reporting Concerns
If you believe a clinical statement on CrackCMS is incorrect or unsafe, please flag it using the in-app report button or email[email protected]. We respond within 24 hours for safety-critical issues.