Christopher Tobias
What they argued
RecovryAI’s one-line reading of the filing.
69 words asking for full-loop auditability of HCP responses to AI outputs; no position on the five markets.
Themes it raises
2 of the 21 themes in the docket, each with the passage we counted, verbatim.
Whether human oversight is real oversightFDA Q3, Q4, Q14, Q20, Q21, Q26
“If HCP responses are dismissed, there should be a reason noted.”
Records that let investigators reconstruct an eventFDA Q19, Q21, Q24, Q26
“the regulations should require "full loop" auditability whereby HCP responses, actions or comments on AI outputs are audited for how those response where used to either adjust hte AI model, adjust knowledge delivery or dismissed”
Read and coded by RecovryAI readers, September 12, 2026. The source text and highlighted passages appear below. Read the filing on regulations.gov ↗
The comment as filed
Comment submitted on regulations.gov. Passages we counted are highlighted.
While current regulations require that HCP be able to comment or dismiss irrelevant or inaccurate AI model outputs they have been presented with, the regulations should require "full loop" auditability whereby HCP responses, actions or comments on AI outputs are audited for how those response where used to either adjust hte AI model, adjust knowledge delivery or dismissed. If HCP responses are dismissed, there should be a reason noted.