PretectalStart here
Freeze a copy of the intended presentation or export. Give it a version label, name the responsible owner, and open the review worksheet for that exact version.
Your finished output: A versioned handoff lists the files delivered, completed checks, resolved issues, actual AI contribution, remaining limits, correction contact, and the responsible person's release decision.
Pause and revise when: A material claim or visual remains unsupported, required review is incomplete, or the delivered file differs from the tested version. Keep the issue open and route it to its owner before release.
Before you start
Review the final experience that learners will receive. Keep a record of what was checked, what changed, and what still needs an owner. A completed checklist records work; it does not certify accuracy or confer accreditation.
For: Presenters, education leads, and content reviewers.
The deliverable: A review record, corrections list, and accurate AI disclosure.
Gather these inputs
- The exact presentation version, including interactive and offline assets
- The claim-to-source map, asset register, and actual AI use record
- The intended audience and any organizer or accredited-provider requirements
The workflow
01Set the review scope
Identify the event, audience, content owner, and version. Establish whether the work is independent accredited education, company education, or promotional material, and obtain the requirements that apply to that activity.
- AI can help
- Organize supplied requirements into a review plan and a list of unresolved questions.
- You decide
- The responsible provider or organizer determines applicable requirements. Do not infer approval from a generic checklist.
- Keep
- A named owner and a defined review scope.
02Inspect claims and visuals
Follow each material claim to its source. Review numbers and caveats together. Check clinical images, diagrams, and animations for their implied teaching claims as well as their labels.
- AI can help
- Compare draft text with the evidence map and flag mismatches for investigation.
- You decide
- A person verifies the original sources and final visuals. An AI agreement with another AI output is not independent verification.
- Keep
- Specific corrections with source locations.
03Test the delivery
Exercise all controls, answers, branches, and fallbacks. Check keyboard access, color contrast, readable charts, and link destinations. Open the actual exported or hosted version, not only the editor preview.
- AI can help
- Draft automated checks for known expected states and summarize test failures.
- You decide
- Watch and listen to the complete lesson. Confirm that feedback and accessibility alternatives preserve the scientific meaning.
- Keep
- A delivery test record and corrected files.
04Describe the AI contribution
Write what AI actually did, which tool was used, when it was used, and how the resulting material was checked. Distinguish planned review from completed review. Follow the provider's disclosure requirements.
- AI can help
- Draft a disclosure from a factual use log, leaving missing details explicitly unresolved.
- You decide
- Do not claim a reviewer, validation, or approval that did not occur. Disclosing AI use does not correct an inaccurate slide.
- Keep
- A factual disclosure with responsible ownership.
05Close and preserve
Resolve material issues, record any remaining limits, and preserve the final presentation with its source and asset records. Set a review trigger such as a changed source, changed interaction, new audience, or provider request.
- AI can help
- Prepare a change log and package manifest from the completed review.
- You decide
- The responsible person decides whether the work is ready and signs the specific version. For accredited education, retain the provider's own approval process.
- Keep
- A versioned handoff and correction route.
A useful starting prompt
This prompt scaffolds a task. It does not verify its own output or replace the review described above.
Use material you are authorized to share. Replace the bracketed inputs and review the result against the original sources.
What changes in practice
A final slide says 'AI was used' while the source of a chart and the review owner remain unclear.
The handoff identifies the generated code and draft text, source locations, corrections, and the person responsible for the final version.
Specific provenance and review records let a team explain its production choices and make future corrections.
Open the presentation review worksheet ↗Ready for handoff
- Material issues have an owner and recorded resolution.
- Disclosure describes actual work and completed review accurately.
- The tested version matches the version that will be delivered.
- A correction route and review triggers accompany the handoff.
Sources and further reading
Source links checked October 2, 2026. Our production workflows are editorial recommendations; provider requirements apply to their own activities.
ACCME · January 30, 2026
Guidance on disclosure, oversight, and independence in ACCME-accredited education.
ACCME · September 22, 2026
Distinguishes reviewed educational materials from dynamically generated clinical answers.
ARBO / COPE
COPE's adopted standards for content validity and independence. Check the applicable provider's requirements.