Authorship, assistance and review status
Educational work by a pre-medical student — not medical advice. Not a clinical protocol, prescription, or patient handout, and not for patient care. See DISCLAIMER.
Recorded 29 October 2026. Portfolio owner: Collin B. George.
Documented contributions
The owner supplied project direction, subject priorities and provenance statements, including confirmation that ICU scenarios are entirely synthetic. The October 2026 revision used OpenAI Codex for drafting and revising documentation and examples, source inspection, scoped software edits and verification, and this portfolio’s presentation and navigation.
The November 2026 review and correction pass used Anthropic's Claude to audit citations, clinical and pharmacological content and disclaimers across the portfolio, run software simulations and tests, and draft corrections. The portfolio owner directed the pass and approved the changes. As above, AI-assisted text is not evidence that the owner independently performed every analysis described.
AI-assisted prose and code are not evidence that the owner independently performed every analysis or clinical task described. This statement covers the documented revision process; it does not reconstruct authorship of every historical file. Repository history and existing provenance records provide further context. No personal reflection, credential, clinical experience or independent reviewer contribution has been invented for this presentation pass.
What the checks establish
| Activity | Scope and limit |
|---|---|
| Source identity and selected-content checks | The recorded audit scope; not full appraisal of every source or a systematic review |
| Software tests, where recorded | Behavior under tested inputs; not device validation, clinical safety or efficacy |
| Documentation and presentation checks | File consistency, navigation and observed rendering; not clinical correctness |
| Independent clinical sign-off | Not recorded in the portfolio revision records |
The cases and numerical examples are synthetic teaching material. No clinical shadowing notes or observations are used. No institution endorses these projects, and the artifacts do not establish clinical competency or authorize patient care. Private working drafts remain private pending separate substantive review.
Review each project in context
Each project has a local reader’s guide and authorship statement linked from its README. See the case index, provenance, publication review, and maintenance process. A source check, a presentation review and a specialist clinical review are different activities; record each only when performed.