When the source needs fixing: What to flag and how to say it

In medical communication, we all depend on what comes before us.

Writers build on templates, clinical input, and regulatory guidelines. Translators work from the writers’ outputs – often under the same pressure to deliver quickly and accurately.

But let’s be honest: by the time a document reaches its next stage, it’s rarely “done.” It’s just the next version.

That’s why commenting on source content – whether it’s a draft, a reference, or a translation-ready file – is an essential skill. Not to nitpick, not to delay, but to make sure what’s being communicated is clear, consistent, and purposeful.

What to flag

Writers and translators may work at different stages, but the red flags are often the same. Here’s what to look out for:

1. Contradictions in procedures, dates, terms, or participant instructions. Even small inconsistencies can cause confusion or delays during ethics or regulatory review. 

   
   

2. Ambiguities Sentences that can be interpreted in more than one way. This becomes especially important in translation, where ambiguity multiplies with each language pair. 

   
   

3. Gaps in logic or missing information Steps skipped, key definitions missing, assumptions made about the reader’s prior knowledge – all of which can reduce understanding and erode trust. 

   
   

4. Unclear terminology or inconsistent phrasing Especially in patient-facing documents, clarity is key. Internal consistency (how something is referred to throughout the document) is equally important. 

   
   

5. Legal or technical language used without adaptation What’s legally correct is not always clear to the average person, and often not appropriate without simplification or explanation. This can apply across all document types, from ICFs to patient leaflets. 

   
   

6. Localisation challenges Some concepts, processes, or terms don’t translate directly due to differences in healthcare systems or cultural context. These need to be addressed proactively, not patched over at the last minute.

How to say it

The reality is that nobody wants to receive a wall of critical comments, especially when working under pressure. So the way you frame feedback makes a real difference.

• Be specific Avoid vague phrases like “This is unclear” and instead say what the issue is and why it matters. 

  
  

• Focus on impact Link your comment to a clear outcome: improving patient understanding, preventing misinterpretation, aligning with the protocol, ensuring consistency across materials, or speeding up approval. 

  
  

• Keep it neutral and collaborative Use language like “Would you consider…” or “Could we clarify whether…” to keep the tone open and solution-focused. 

  
  

• Suggest a fix, when appropriate You don’t need to rewrite everything, but if you see a better way to phrase something, offering a suggestion can move things forward faster. 

  
  

• Prioritise what matters Pick your battles. You don’t need to flag every minor style preference – focus on issues that could have real consequences for the project, the reader, or the review process.

Why it matters

Well, it depends on context.... For writers, it might mean scientific accuracy, adherence to templates, or regulatory alignment. For translators, it means preserving intent, ensuring readability, and adapting to new audiences.

But for both, it ultimately depends on clarity.

That clarity starts with the source. And improving the source – even just flagging one confusing sentence or one missing definition – can have a ripple effect all the way through to the final delivered material.

Too often, comments are treated as a nuisance. But when they’re well-placed, they’re not a bottleneck – they’re risk management, patient advocacy, and quality assurance rolled into one.

Whether you're writing, translating, or reviewing: You’re not “just being thorough.” You’re protecting the purpose of the document

You’re the one asking the uncomfortable question when something doesn’t add up. You’re the one spotting what the AI won’t. You’re the one ensuring the message reaches the right audience – clearly, consistently, and in the right voice.

And that’s not overstepping. That’s doing the job well.