NursingAtoms
HolisticEvidence · Spark-to-Evidence

Your Observation.
Published Evidence.

Record a clinical observation. Our AI crystallizes, validates, and drafts. You refine, approve, and publish. Every step has a human checkpoint — because evidence needs both intelligence and judgment.

Voice InputAI-AssistedHuman-ReviewedPeer-Published

⚠ This is not a literature search tool. This is a research generation platform where a clinician's spoken observation becomes a published, citable research article — with explicit human review, refinement, and approval at every stage.

How it works

Three Steps. Three Human Checkpoints.

Every AI action is explicitly reviewed. Nothing moves forward without you.

01
Voice Input

Speak a Spark

Press once. Speak naturally in English, Hindi, or your regional language. We transcribe and de-identify in seconds. This is the seed of a research article.

02
AI-Assisted + Human Review

Validate & Refine

AI extracts concepts, maps to standard terminologies, and cross-references published knowledge. You review every finding — accept, revise, or reject — through a conversational thread.

03
Human Approved

Review, Approve & Publish

When the dialogue has generated enough substance, AI weaves a complete IMRaD manuscript. You review every section, confirm ethics declarations, and give explicit final approval before submission.

Try it now · MVP

Capture your first Spark.

Record up to 5 minutes. Audio stays private to your account. Concept extraction, cross-system literature match, and IMRaD drafting roll out next — every Spark queued today will run through the full pipeline once it’s live.

Capture

Start a Spark

Record a clinical observation — up to 5 minutes. Audio is private to your account; only you can play it back.

Ready

Max 5 min · stored privately

Your Sparks

Recent captures

How the full pipeline will work

See the Review Controls in Action

Click through the stages. Accept, revise, or reject each AI output. Experience the full human-in-the-loop flow — in both an allopathy and an Ayurveda clinical scenario.

AI OutputUser Action / TealWarning / SaffronApproved / Green
Recorded
Concepts Reviewed
Draft Reviewed
Submitted
RecordingEnglish1:52
"I've noticed something across my last seven shifts in the surgical ward. Three patients — all males aged 40–55, all post-op day 2–3 for abdominal surgery — developed unexpected tachycardia and hypotension that didn't respond to standard fluid resuscitation. Each had uneventful surgeries. No signs of hemorrhage or sepsis. But all three had been on some kind of herbal supplement pre-op that wasn't documented in their medication reconciliation."
1Stage 1 — AI Concept Extraction

✓ Concepts extracted

  • Post-operative tachycardiaSNOMED: 426627000
  • HypotensionSNOMED: 45007003
  • Abdominal surgery — post-op complication
  • Undocumented herbal supplement
  • Medication reconciliation gap
  • Male 40–55 age group
AI Output
"These concepts suggest a pattern of post-operative hemodynamic instability potentially linked to undocumented pre-operative herbal supplement use. The primary research direction would be investigating the gap in pre-op medication reconciliation for traditional/herbal products."

Your review — required to proceed

Human-in-the-Loop by Design

Every Safeguard, Explicitly Enforced

This is not an afterthought. Each of these protections is hard-coded into the workflow — not optional, not bypassable.

Every AI output reviewed

Accept, Revise, or Reject at every stage. No AI output moves forward without your explicit action.

Full manuscript review

Section-by-section approval of the complete draft before any submission is possible.

Ethics & authorship declared

Mandatory checklist covering conflicts of interest, patient de-identification, AI disclosure, and author contributions.

AI contribution disclosed

Every publication transparently records AI assistance — in full compliance with ICMJE, COPE, and journal ethics policies.

Audit trail from spark to publication

Every action, acceptance, and revision is logged with timestamp and user identity — an immutable record of the research journey.

Peer review — not auto-publish

Submission goes to HolisticEvidence peer review. Your approval starts the journey; independent reviewers complete it.

“Not a literature search. Not an auto-publish bot. A research partner that does the heavy lifting — but you hold the pen, the judgment, and the final say. Because evidence needs both intelligence and accountability.”
Compliance Summary
  • ✓ Every AI output requires explicit human acceptance, revision, or rejection
  • ✓ Full manuscript review before any submission
  • ✓ Mandatory ethics and authorship declarations
  • ✓ AI contribution transparently disclosed in every publication
  • ✓ Audit trail preserved from Spark to Publication
  • ✓ Peer review — nothing published without independent review
Open Voice-to-Research