01
Separate claims from sources
You identify the draft's major claims and match each one to self-report, collateral information, observation, records, or supplied measures. You mark any claim with no clear source.
Made for Clinical Psychologists
Check Whether Your Case Summary Is Evidence-Balanced
Also useful for: people in Healthcare
15 min
Beginner
Healthcare
Build Professional Skills
Use a focused evidence audit to flag claims that are well supported, incomplete, contradicted, or stronger than the source material allows.
We'll use them to write your prompt.
Completed ✓
Make Your Play
Give us the situation. We’ll build the prompt.
Case summaries can sound more certain than the underlying interviews, observations, records, and supplied measures justify.
Your answers save as you type.
What you'll do
This is the plan inside your prompt. Add your details first. Then follow these steps with ChatGPT or Claude.
02
Run the balance check
You test the draft for evidence support, counterevidence, functional detail, strengths, context, uncertainty, and wording that exceeds the record.
03
Make and verify priority edits
You revise the highest-risk wording first, then compare every change with the original record and your documentation requirements.
Make Your Play
Check Whether Your Case Summary Is Evidence-Balanced
Tell us what the prompt needs to know
Start with the questions below. Each answer personalizes the playbook and builds the prompt you’ll use at the end.
Your situation
Paste the de-identified case summary you want to check.
0/10000
List the de-identified interview notes, observations, collateral information, records, and supplied measure results that support or conflict with the draft.
0/10000
Describe relevant functional settings, strengths, protective factors, cultural context, access barriers, stressors, and alternative explanations found in the record.
0/10000
Enter any required wording, report structure, uncertainty standard, or local documentation rule the review should respect.
0/10000
This playbook was updated. Review your inputs before copying.
What you'll do
Check a step when you finish it.
01
Separate claims from sources
You identify the draft's major claims and match each one to self-report, collateral information, observation, records, or supplied measures. You mark any claim with no clear source.
02
Run the balance check
You test the draft for evidence support, counterevidence, functional detail, strengths, context, uncertainty, and wording that exceeds the record.
03
Make and verify priority edits
You revise the highest-risk wording first, then compare every change with the original record and your documentation requirements.
Fill in the fields above to generate your prompt preview.
Assembled prompt
Beginner instructions
Remove names and other identifying details before pasting anything. Keep the draft separate from the source notes so the assistant can compare them. Review every flag yourself, since a wording difference may reflect context the assistant can’t see.
Advanced instructions
Run a second pass by source type, such as self-report, collateral information, observation, records, and supplied measures. Check whether certainty changes appropriately when sources disagree or measure validity, norms, timing, or administration conditions limit interpretation.
Use this when
Use this after drafting a case summary and before signing, sharing, or using it to guide further assessment. It is especially useful when sources disagree, measures have limits, or important history remains unclear.
You'll need
- Draft case summary
- Source material
- Context and strengths
- Documentation standards
You'll get
- Every major claim checked for a visible source, support, conflicting evidence, functional impact, strengths, relevant context, and uncertainty
- Language that goes beyond the notes revised or removed
- Unresolved questions recorded
- The final wording personally verified against the original record.
By the end of this playbook
You will have:
- Every major claim checked for a visible source, support, conflicting evidence, functional impact, strengths, relevant context, and uncertainty
- Language that goes beyond the notes revised or removed
- Unresolved questions recorded
- The final wording personally verified against the original record.
Examples
Progress 1 of 3