Case Study: Rare Disease
When meaning matters more than speed.
Rare disease interviews are different.
Caregivers speak carefully, often revising details as they describe symptoms and timelines. Clinicians move between evolving observations and limited treatment pathways. Language shifts mid-sentence as people search for precision.
An automated transcription tool was fast. It was also unreliable.
Clinical terminology was inconsistent. Corrections were missed. Adverse event language required repeated review. The team found themselves spending more time correcting transcripts than learning from them. They needed accuracy they could trust.
What Changed
Before the project began, the client flagged that adverse event (AE) training would be required. Wordibly ensured the full project team and proofreading staff completed AE training prior to work starting.
Human transcribers focused on capturing the spoken word accurately, including revisions, clarifications, and clinically relevant phrasing. Quality reviewers checked transcripts carefully against study expectations and reporting requirements.
Nothing was rushed. Nothing was assumed.
The Result
Symptom timelines were clearer. Safety language was consistent. Caregiver and clinician perspectives were captured as stated, without distortion.
Why It Mattered
In rare disease research, accuracy protects trust. Human transcription supported reliable review and reporting where automation introduced risk.
The Result
Symptom timelines were clearer. Safety language was consistent. Caregiver and clinician perspectives were captured as stated, without distortion.
Why It Mattered
In rare disease research, accuracy protects trust. Human transcription supported reliable review and reporting where automation introduced risk.