Start with a defined trigger
A marketing owner requests review of a planned publication.
Draft claims-to-evidence checklist
This is a proposed workflow pattern. We confirm data access, permissions, integration options and review ownership with your team before implementation.
AI does not certify legal compliance or independently validate research. Never manufacture a source or testimonial.
A marketing owner requests review of a planned publication.
Collect the draft, approved product facts, source studies or measurements and claim-review standards.
Extract factual assertions, link available evidence and flag mismatches in dates, scope or meaning.
Product and designated specialist reviewers approve claims and any required qualifications.
Store the accepted wording and supporting evidence with the publication record.
Measure unsupported claims found, inaccurate citations, missing qualifications and reviewer preparation time.
Keep the input, relevant context, review decision and final result connected. When a reviewer corrects something, use that evidence to improve the instructions or integration, then validate the change against representative cases.
The workflow stays centered on your business. The engagement determines who learns, implements and operates it.
Learn through courses, practical training and workshops. Get feedback as you apply the lessons to your own project.
Explore courses and workshops ↗Get everything in DIY, three months of workshops, weekly team sessions and direct implementation coaching.
Explore guided implementation ↗Include all the learning and guidance, with ownership of agreed operations and major implementation decisions.
Explore managed delivery ↗Prepare focused edits against a maintained voice guide and approved terminology.
Explore this solution ↗Looking for a course, help with a difficult problem, or someone to build a solution? Tell us where you are and what you'd like to do next.