How StudieDoktorn checks medical content against sources

StudieDoktorn is Kiarrow's study platform for Swedish medical students. It is our own product. The site is reachable, but the product is pre-launch: payments stay closed until launch, and a separate app in the App Store and Google Play has not launched.

This article describes how the content is meant to be produced. It is not medical advice, and it does not restate clinical claims about work-up, dose or treatment.

Education, not decision support

StudieDoktorn's public boundary is plain: clinical, preclinical, ECG, anatomy and medication content is study material. It is not clinical decision support, not individual medical advice, and not support for prescribing to real patients.

Synthetic cases, OSCE stations and practice charts are practice. They are not a patient encounter and not a prescribing system.

Which sources may carry a clinical claim

Clinical topics must be backed by the Swedish source set the product allows. The product's source policy names, among others:

• 1177 for healthcare professionals and 1177 Vårdguiden
• Nationellt kliniskt kunskapsstöd (the national clinical knowledge support)
• The National Board of Health and Welfare (Socialstyrelsen)
• The Medical Products Agency (Läkemedelsverket) and Läkemedelsboken
• The Public Health Agency of Sweden (Folkhälsomyndigheten)
• Vårdhandboken
• The Swedish Resuscitation Council (HLR-rådet)

The list is an overview, not a licence to republish those publishers' texts. StudieDoktorn writes its own teaching copy and links to the original document. A working link is not enough as publication proof.

1177 Vårdguiden is patient information. In the source policy it must not be the sole basis for a red flag, a first assessment step, or a clinical claim outside an explicit patient-information section.

A verbatim quote, then publication

The product workflow is roughly: register the source, fetch the document, write a grounded draft, check the quote against the fetched text, and only then publish. A matching quote shows that the sentence was in the source. It does not prove that the summary reads the source correctly, and it is not external medical review.

Missing evidence should become a gap, not an invented claim, dose or source. StudieDoktorn should not ship “reviewed” badges without a real, implemented mechanism.

The tutor cites, and refuses patient questions

The AI tutor is one capability inside the study loop, not the product category. It should answer from StudieDoktorn's material and allowed sources, with citations, say when something is not covered, and refuse patient-specific questions.

Current scope, free surfaces and terms live on studiedoktorn.se. The case study on this site: StudieDoktorn.

Summary

StudieDoktorn's point is not to let a model write medicine. The point is that a published claim should be traceable to a named Swedish source, and that the product says no when it cannot.

More about the company behind the products is on About the company.