Checking vs changing: a subtle but important distinction in medical editing

Why clients worry about losing their voice

One of the most common concerns I hear from clients is this:

‘I’m worried editing will change my intended meaning.’

It’s an understandable concern. Medical and medico-legal documents are often the product of years of training, experience and professional judgement. Authors quite rightly want their expertise, reasoning and conclusions to remain intact.

This is where an important distinction comes in – the difference between checking and changing.

Editing medical documents is not rewriting

At its core, medical editing is not about rewriting a document or imposing a different style. It is about checking that what the author intends to communicate is conveyed clearly, accurately and consistently to the intended audience.

What ‘checking’ really means in medical editing

Most of the work I do involves careful checking:

• checking terminology for accuracy and consistency

• checking references, images, tables and graphs against the text

• checking that sentences mean what they appear to mean

• checking that the logic flows and nothing important is left open to interpretation

In many cases, this checking results in very small adjustments – a clarified phrase, a reordered sentence, a consistent term used throughout. The aim is always to support the author’s message, not replace it.

When changes become necessary

Of course, there are times when checking reveals a genuine problem. A sentence may be ambiguous. A term may be used in a way that could be misunderstood. A small inconsistency might raise questions for a reader who is scrutinising the document closely.

In those cases, change becomes necessary – but only to the extent required to:

• remove ambiguity

• prevent misinterpretation

• correct factual or internal inconsistencies

• ensure the document meets professional and guideline expectations

Any changes should be proportionate and purposeful, guided by context and intent rather than a desire to ‘improve’ the text stylistically.

How medical editors preserve authorial voice and intended meaning

A key part of experienced medical editing is knowing when not to intervene. Not every sentence needs polishing. Not every stylistic choice needs standardising. Voice matters, particularly in medico-legal reports and medical content where professional tone and authority are so vital.

Good editing preserves the author’s expertise, their reasoning and conclusions, their professional voice, while quietly removing obstacles to understanding.

Why the distinction matters in medical content

The difference between checking and changing may seem subtle, but it has important implications. Over-editing risks diluting meaning, altering emphasis or, worst of all, changing the author’s intended meaning. Under-editing risks leaving ambiguity, inconsistency or error in place.

In medical and medico-legal contexts, where documents may be relied upon by clinicians, lawyers, regulators or courts, this balance matters. Precision is essential – but so is restraint.

Experience makes the difference

Knowing how to strike that balance comes from experience: familiarity with medical language, with how documents are used in practice, and with the consequences of seemingly small changes.

Editing is not a mechanical process. It involves judgement – understanding when a change protects meaning and when it risks distorting it.

Striking the right balance between clarity and restraint

Editing medical content is not about taking ownership of the text. It is about safeguarding clarity, accuracy and credibility, while allowing the author’s knowledge to stand front and centre.

Checking versus changing is a subtle distinction, but respecting it is what makes medical editing effective, trustworthy and professional.

---

A note on terminology: The terms medical copyeditor, medical proofreader and medical editor are often confused and used interchangeably. To add to the confusion, there are yet other terms used for different niches such as plain-English editor, medico-legal copyeditor or editorial assistant (the latter is commonly used in medical communications). I personally use medical editor to describe my role, and medical editing to describe both medical copyediting and medical proofreading, as this suggests a hybrid approach as per my own clients' preferences ... plus, it's simpler! See here for more detail on the traditional differences between proofreading and copyediting.

---

To learn more about me and my background, please take a closer look here.