If you’re writing a medical manuscript today, chances are you’ve already experimented with AI tools to proofread your work. And why not? AI can quickly catch typos, clean up awkward phrasing, and even generate summaries of your findings. As the Saudi Medical Journal recently noted, these tools can even help you align with journal and regulatory standards. That’s a real time-saver for someone like you who is balancing research, clinical work, and the pressure to publish.

But here’s the challenge: AI doesn’t actually understand medicine. As studies in JAMA and Nature Medicine have pointed out, large language models sometimes “hallucinate.” That means they can invent details, misrepresent clinical facts, or even generate completely fabricated references. You don’t want this happening in your manuscript — especially not when a peer reviewer or editor is reading it. Even a small error like this can raise doubts about your rigor, delay your publication, or worse, damage your credibility.

That’s why you still need a human safeguard. AI is a useful assistant, but it isn’t a final authority. You need someone who not only understands grammar but also understands your science. Someone with medical training in your particular field — cardiology, oncology, hematology, gastroenterology — who can recognize when your results are being undermined by unclear phrasing, or when your methodology isn’t being communicated with the precision it deserves.