Clinical AI workflow vs Legal AI workflow.
Use this page when the buyer is choosing which review workflow fits the deployment. Clinical AI workflow speaks to health systems, clinical-AI committees, hospital compliance, payor IT and cites HHS §1557, HIPAA-out-of-scope by construction, FDA SaMD / PCCP, ONC HTI-1 predictive-DSI transparency, CMS utilization rules; Legal AI workflow speaks to AmLaw firms, in-house general counsel, court chambers, litigation support and cites FRE 702, proposed FRE 707, ABA Model Rules 1.1 / 1.6 / 3.3 / 5.1–5.3, ABA Formal Opinion 512. Both emit the same evidence record for fielded AI tools: seven Astrolabe measurement-engine fields documented at /schema, with the evidence check recomputing either record byte-for-byte in the browser.
Side-by-side.
vs
Law-board — Legal AI workflow
Legal AI workflow: legal-research, drafting, citation-faithfulness, contract-review AI
Legal AI workflow: FRE 702, proposed FRE 707, ABA Model Rules 1.1 / 1.6 / 3.3 / 5.1–5.3, ABA Formal Opinion 512
Legal AI workflow: AmLaw firms, in-house general counsel, court chambers, litigation support
Which kit fits the buyer.
If the buyer's question spans both domains — e.g. a defense-medical research office, a school-district legal opinion — the answer is “both kits, one bundle”: the Astrolabe measurement method is the same, so one Phase 0 sweep can emit two cover sheets without redoing the math.