Skip to main content
Paste a draft slide headline and the underlying clinical study. Anara checks whether the wording accurately reflects the study design, the patient population, and the reported result, then suggests revised options that stay defensible. For medical writers and medical affairs professionals who need headlines that survive MLR review.

​
1. Describe the task

The data visualization is done. The analysis is clean. The headline still is not right: it either overstates what the study shows or undersells it in ways that lose the clinical story. You have iterated on it four times and the language still has not landed. Anara can run the accuracy check for you. Paste the draft headline and tell Anara which study it is supposed to reflect. Anara reads the study, checks the headline against what the data actually shows, and tells you whether the wording is defensible. It also suggests tighter alternatives when the draft overstates the finding or leaves ambiguity that a reviewer will catch. Here a medical communications writer at a pharma agency has a cardiovascular slide program in development and is working on the headline for a projection model slide on MACE event reduction through intensive LDL-C lowering. 
I am drafting a headline for a slide about MACE event reduction in patients with prior atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The underlying study is already in my library. Here is my current draft headline:

"Comprehensive Risk Factor Control, Led by Intensive LDL-C Lowering, Can Substantially Reduce Projected CV Events"

Check this wording against the study in my library. Tell me:
- Is "comprehensive risk factor control" accurate given what the study modeled?
- Is "substantially reduce" supported by the magnitude of the effect reported?
- Does "projected CV events" accurately reflect the study design (a modeling study, not a clinical trial)?

If anything is inaccurate or overstated, suggest revised wording that is accurate and still communicates the clinical story.

​
2. Give Anara context

Required context
  • The source study in your library.
  • Your current draft headline or callout.
Optional context
  • The study design type (RCT, modeling study, observational). Naming it helps Anara flag any mismatch between how the data was generated and how the headline describes it.
  • The intended slide context: whether the headline accompanies a Kaplan-Meier curve, a forest plot, a projection model, or raw tabular data. Different visualization types support different claim strengths.

​
3. What Anara creates

A line-by-line accuracy assessment of your draft headline, with a reference to the specific study passage that either supports or contradicts each phrase. Where the headline is accurate, Anara confirms it. Where it overstates, simplifies, or mischaracterizes the study design, Anara identifies the problem and proposes alternative wording. The output is a working accuracy review, not a final determination: regulatory review remains a human function. Anara checks accuracy against the source; MLR reviewers check accuracy plus regulatory context.

​
4. Follow-up prompts

​
Check the footnote attribution

When the headline passes but the footnote describing the data source needs to be verified. 
Here is the footnote I have drafted for this slide: "Projections derived by applying age-, sex-, and race-specific prevalence estimates from the NHANES 2013-2016 cohort to a standard Markov model."

Check this footnote against the methods section of the study. Is the description of the modeling methodology accurate? Flag any phrase that misrepresents what the paper actually did.

​
Draft a shorter callout version

When the headline is accurate but too long for the slide format you are working in. 
The headline we validated is accurate but runs to 17 words. Draft three alternative versions under 12 words that preserve the key clinical claim: intensive LDL-C lowering as the leading driver of projected CV event reduction. All three should be defensible based on the study we checked.

​
Verify the statistical framing

When a headline includes a percentage or an odds ratio and you want to confirm the number and its framing. 
The headline I want to use states that intensive LDL-C lowering reduces projected MACE events by 28%. Check the study for: where this figure appears, whether it reflects the primary analysis or a sensitivity analysis, and whether "reduces" is the right verb given how the calculation was done.

​
5. Tricks, tips, and troubleshooting

​
How you word your prompt shapes what you get

Break the headline into its components in the prompt. “Check this headline” returns a general assessment. “Check whether ‘substantially reduce’ is supported by the reported effect size” returns a precise verdict on the phrase the MLR reviewer will flag. For modeling studies, name the study design type explicitly: the claim “substantially reduces CV events” means something different for a Markov model projection than for an RCT, and Anara catches that distinction if you name it.

​
Check the output against your own understanding

Anara checks wording against the study data, but it does not know the full regulatory and promotional context that your MLR team carries. A headline that is statistically accurate may still be inappropriate under promotional guidelines for a specific drug in a specific market. Anara’s accuracy verdict is the first gate, not the last one. Use it to correct outright misrepresentations before MLR review, not as a substitute for that review.

​
What to do with the output next

Use the accuracy review to revise the headline before submitting to your MLR team. A pre-checked headline with source passages cited produces a faster review: reviewers focus on regulatory appropriateness rather than fact-checking. For recurring slide programs, save the accuracy review as a note alongside the slide: the documentation trail is useful when the slide is repurposed or updated after a follow-on study publishes.