# How to review possible protocol drift

Use a difference between local guidance and published evidence as a structured review question.

Canonical URL: https://attendme.ai/guides/review-protocol-drift

Availability: live. Content review: editorial; Automated source and product-fact consistency checks; 2026-10-14.

## Identify the document

Confirm the authorised local source and its current version. Check the issuing organisation and review date.

## Name the difference

Write the exact point of potential disagreement without implying that the protocol is wrong.

## Inspect the comparison

Check source date, region, population and practical context. New research does not automatically supersede local guidance.

## Record the review

Keep the sources and unresolved questions visible. Use the institution's process to decide whether a change is appropriate.

## A worked workflow example

Use a possible difference as a review question rather than a declaration that a protocol is wrong. Begin with a Fellow protocol item or the original documents. A useful review needs the current local source and external evidence.

### Your input

When the Fellow surfaces a possible difference, ask: 'Does this source justify reviewing the cited passage in our current approved protocol?' Record the document title, version and exact passage beside the external paper's identifier. Do not assume that a disagreement exists for any particular topic.

### In AttendMe

Open Digital Fellow with eligible plan access. Open the protocol item and select Open protocol when that action is available. If the item lacks a comparison or either source, collect the original material and use a de-identified Chat question to investigate the precise point.

### What you inspect

Confirm the local document is current. Inspect the external paper's date, population, setting and outcome. Consider local resources and prior governance decisions. A protocol-version update and disagreement with research are different events. One does not establish the other.

### Your reviewed result

Example review note: 'Current protocol: confirm version. Local passage: identify it. External source: identify the paper and supporting passage. Question for the team: state the possible difference. Unresolved context: list what needs confirmation.' Use the institution's review process. AttendMe does not automatically amend or approve a protocol.

## Before you reuse the result

Use this final check to decide whether the work is ready to discuss, save or continue. A useful output preserves its evidence, its scope and the questions it could not answer.

- The review uses the current approved protocol version.

- Both sides of the possible difference have supporting passages.

- A version notice is not mistaken for evidence of clinical disagreement.

- The note states uncertainty and names the responsible team.

Continue: https://attendme.ai/auth/signup?intent=protocols