How medical editors handle technical terminology without altering meaning

One of the most common concerns clients raise about medical editing is whether an editor might inadvertently change the meaning of technically precise text. This concern is entirely reasonable. In medical, scientific and medico-legal contexts, small changes in wording can have significant implications.

Professional medical editors work with complex terminology in ways that preserve meaning while improving clarity. This post explains how that is done in practice, with examples drawn from both clinical and medico-legal material (all examples are fictional to protect client confidentiality).

Meaning comes first – always

In medical and medico-legal editing, clarity is important, but accuracy is paramount. Editors do not aim to simplify content by removing technical language or 'dumbing down' concepts.

Instead, the goal is to ensure that specialised terminology is:

• used correctly

• used consistently

• interpreted unambiguously by the intended reader

Any change that could affect meaning must be justified, transparent and, where necessary, discussed with the author.

Strategy 1: Respecting established clinical and legal terminology

Medical editors do not replace technical or legal terms with approximate alternatives for stylistic reasons.

Examples

Original:

The patient developed atrial fibrillation postoperatively.

Not edited to:

The patient developed an irregular heartbeat after surgery.

Atrial fibrillation has a specific clinical definition that in many contexts should not be diluted. Replacing it with a general phrase such as irregular heartbeat would reduce precision, as several rhythm disturbances can be described in that way. Where clarification is appropriate for non-specialist readers, an editor may recommend adding a brief explanation rather than substituting the term, for example: The patient developed atrial fibrillation (an irregular heart rhythm) postoperatively.

Original:

The claimant sustained a fracture of the distal radius.

Not edited to:

The claimant broke their wrist.

While the second version may be acceptable in a general context, it is less precise in a medico-legal report. Where additional clarification is helpful for the reader, some expert witnesses choose to include a brief glossary of clinical terms within their reports, rather than replacing precise terminology in the body of the text.

Strategy 2: Improving syntax without touching terminology

Many clarity issues arise from sentence structure rather than from terminology.

Examples

Original:

Treatment was discontinued following identification of adverse effects associated with administration of the drug.

Edited:

The drug was discontinued after adverse effects were identified.

Original:

Concerns were raised in relation to the adequacy of monitoring.

Edited:

Concerns were raised about the adequacy of monitoring.

The edits improve clarity without altering meaning or tone.

Strategy 3: Preserving causation and attribution

In medico-legal writing, language relating to causation, responsibility and probability must be handled with particular care.

Examples

Original:

The delay in diagnosis resulted in progression of the claimant’s disease.

An editor may query whether resulted in accurately reflects the author’s intended meaning, or whether a more cautious formulation is required:

may have contributed to; or on the balance of probabilities

Crucially, the editor would query rather than change this wording without author confirmation.

Strategy 4: Standardising terminology across complex reports

Using multiple terms to refer to the same person or the same clinical concept within one report can undermine clarity and credibility, even when each term is technically correct.

Examples

Original usage within a single document:

claimant; and patient; and the individual; and Mr Smith

Although these terms may all refer to the same person, alternating between them without a clear reason can distract the reader or create unnecessary ambiguity. A medical editor may recommend consistent use of claimant or the patient’s name throughout a medico-legal report, in line with convention and clarity.

Similarly, clinical terms should not alternate without reason:

cerebrovascular accident; and stroke

While these terms are often used interchangeably, switching between them within the same document can be confusing. Consistent terminology supports precision and readability without altering meaning.

Strategy 5: Clarifying timing of events

Timing is often critical in medico-legal contexts.

Example

Original:

Symptoms developed following discharge.

Edited:

Symptoms developed two days after discharge.

If the timing is known, specifying it improves clarity. If it is not, an editor would query rather than infer.

Strategy 6: Handling probability and standard of proof

Medico-legal writing often relies on carefully graded language.

Examples

Original:

On the balance of probabilities, the injury was caused by the fall.

Not edited to:

The injury was caused by the fall.

Removing the legal qualifier would materially change the meaning. Editors are alert to these distinctions and preserve them.

Original:

In my opinion, it is more likely than not that the claimant’s symptoms were attributable to the index event.

Not edited to:

The claimant’s symptoms were attributable to the index event.

Phrases such as in my opinion and more likely than not signal both attribution and a specific standard of probability. Removing this qualifying language would materially alter the level of certainty being expressed. Medical editors are careful to preserve these distinctions and would not change them without author confirmation.

Strategy 7: Improving flow without strengthening claims

Editors often refine sentence structure while preserving evidential weight.

Examples

Original:

It is my opinion that the failure to escalate care may have contributed to the outcome.

Edited:

In my opinion, the failure to escalate care may have contributed to the outcome.

The change improves flow but does not alter certainty, attribution or responsibility.

Original:

It was found that higher vaccination coverage was associated with a reduction in hospital admissions.

Edited:

Higher vaccination coverage was associated with a reduction in hospital admissions.

The edit removes an unnecessary introductory phrase, improving flow and readability, but it does not change the strength of the association or imply causation where none is stated.

Strategy 8: Querying ambiguity in expert opinion

When an opinion could be read in more than one way, editors flag this.

Example

Original:

The management was inappropriate.

An editor may query:

• Inappropriate by reference to which standard?

• At what point in the care pathway?

This protects both clarity and legal robustness.

Strategy 9: Using plain English without diluting evidential language

Plain English can coexist with technical precision.

Example

Original:

There was a failure to adhere to accepted clinical standards.

Edited:

Accepted clinical standards were not followed.

The meaning and legal implication are unchanged; the sentence is simply clearer.

Strategy 10: Making changes transparent

Given the complexity of medical content, and the sensitivity of medico-legal material in particular, professional editors use track changes and comments to ensure:

• all edits are visible

• no meaning is altered without discussion

• the author retains full control

Transparency is essential in high-stakes contexts.

Final thoughts

Medical and medico-legal editing requires restraint, judgement and respect for meaning. Editors work to clarify language, standardise terminology and improve readability while preserving the evidential and technical integrity of the text.

By querying rather than assuming, and by understanding the implications of small wording changes, medical editors help ensure that complex material is both clear and accurate.

If you have concerns about how editing might affect medical or medico-legal terminology in your work, a professional medical editor should be able to explain their approach clearly – and demonstrate it through careful, example-based editing.

---

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 and 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.