Alphadoc, the AI agent workspace for healthcare.

Finding evidence. Writing notes. Hand both to Alphadoc. It works from the latest medical literature and clinical guidelines, plus your internal documents as they change.

Workspace › Papers

Alphadoc

Papers

Literature from Viore

AllReviewsOriginalGuidelines

GuidelineTherapeutic monitoring of vancomycin for serious MRSA infections: a revised consensus guidelineRybak MJ et al. · 2020

GuidelineSurviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2021Evans L et al. · 2021

GuidelineTRIPOD+AI statement: updated guidance for reporting clinical prediction modelsCollins GS et al. · 2024

Reading1 / 2 · Abstract

Therapeutic monitoring of vancomycin for serious MRSA infections

Revised consensus guideline

Rybak MJ et al. · Am J Health Syst Pharm · 2020

Abstract

This revision updates vancomycin dosing and monitoring for serious MRSA infections. An individualized AUC target of 400–600 mg·h/L (MIC 1 mg/L) is advised. Trough-only monitoring at 15–20 mg/L is no longer recommended, as it adds kidney injury risk. Bayesian AUC estimation is the preferred method.

Alphadoc

Ask Alphadoc about this paperSelect a passage, or just ask.

Why AUC instead of trough?

The revision favors AUC-guided dosing over trough targets.

Target AUC 400–600 (MIC 1)1

Trough-only 15–20 is no longer advised due to kidney risk2

Bayesian AUC estimation is preferred

Evidence 2Rybak 2020

Ask about this paperWhy AUC instead of trough?Source: This paper

Workspace › New note

P&T committee

Only me · Today

Adopt AUC-based vancomycin TDM

24 h stop compliance for prophylaxis

Posting schedule for the revision

Decisions

Post the revision as required reading

To-dos

Review a TDM calculator

Schedule surgical team training

AE reporting SOP

TRIPOD+AI

Must read

Alphadoc

Hello, Alphadoc

What should we look into?

All sourcesEverything

Latest medical sourcesPapers · guidelines

My materialsNotes · documents

Internal boardNotices · standards

Ask Alphadoc, or type @ to add a sourceAntibiotic guideline revisionPut the changes in a tableSourcesSources: Internal board

Antibiotic guideline revisionPut the changes in a table

What changed

The revision aligns prophylaxis timing and duration with international guidelines. Board

TimingWithin 60 minGuideline

DurationStop within 24 hGuideline

VancomycinAUC 400–600Paper

Sources 3BoardGuidelinePaper

Sorted into decisions and to-dos

Add to noteAdded to note

New chatNew notePapers

Decisions · to-dos

Everything, on one screen.

Your materials on the left. What you're reading in the center. Alphadoc on the right.

Hello, Alphadoc

Ask a question and get answers grounded in your saved literature and notes.

Ask Alphadoc, or type @ to add a sourceAI mammography pilot mid-review memo Compare the pilot with overseas studies, metric by metric

Sources

Add a source

AI mammography pilot mid-review memoMy notes

AI-supported screen reading (MASAI)Papers

AI reading pilot: September resultsInternal board

Pick up where you left off7View all

NameTypeLast opened

AI mammography pilot mid-review memoMy notesToday

Evidence for AI-assisted mammography readingChatToday

Artificial intelligence-supported screen reading versus standard double reading in the MASAI trialPaperOct 16

New patient flow in the 3F imaging area (from Oct 20)Internal boardOct 16

LDCT lung screening eligibilityMy notesOct 15

ACR Lung-RADS v2022 summaryGuidelineOct 13

What's new

New literatureMore

Effectiveness of the Korean National Cancer Screening Program in reducing gastric cancer mortalityGastroenterology · Added by Viore · Oct 16

Development and validation of a deep learning-based automatic detection algorithm for malignant pulmonary nodulesRadiology · Added by Viore · Oct 1

GuidelinesMore

ACR Lung-RADS v2022 summaryNodule categories · follow-up intervals · Oct 13

USPSTF breast cancer screening (2024)Biennial mammography, ages 40–74 · Grade B · Oct 11

AI mammography pilot mid-review memo Compare the pilot with overseas studies, metric by metric

Put the pilot metrics in the same units as the overseas studies

MASAI and ScreenTrustCAD both compared AI-assisted reading with standard double reading, but they read differently. Lancet Oncol+1 The pilot uses one reader plus AI, so it lines up best with ScreenTrustCAD. Pilot mid-review

Metrics side by side

MetricPilot (Sep)In the published studies

Recall rate4.1% → 3.6%Similar in MASAI: 2.2% vs 2.0%. Lancet Oncol

Reading load28% less time per readMASAI cut screen-reading workload by 44%. Lancet Oncol

Cancer detectionFinal count end of OctMASAI: 6.1 vs 5.1 per 1,000. Lancet Oncol

Reading setupOne reader + AISame as AI plus one reader in ScreenTrustCAD. Lancet Digit Health

Recall dropped in the pilot but was similar in MASAI. Until cancer detection is in, avoid judging reading performance on recall alone. Pilot Sep results

Sources 4

Ask Alphadoc, or type @ to add a source

Sources

Saved to Favorites

Pilot weekly review minutes

DetailsOnly me · #minutes · #pilot · Edited just now

When: Oct 17, 15:00–15:40 · Where: 3F meeting room

Attendees: Radiology, Screening ops, Quality, Clinical research

Agenda

1.Recall and reading time for Oct weeks 1–2

2.Follow-up results for September recalls

3.Material for the Oct 24 mid-review

What we found

Recall for Oct weeks 1–2 was 3.7%, close to September (3.6%).

Time saved per read held at about 28%, as in September.

81% of September recalls have follow-up results back.

Decisions

Show the Oct 24 numbers in the same metrics as the studies (recall, cancer detection).

Report time per read separately; it is not the papers' reading workload.

Next steps

Chase follow-up results still missing

Draft the Oct 24 mid-review deck

My notes

Every note you've written, in one place.

New note

VisibilityAllSortEditedTagsAllSearch notespilot

Pilot weekly review minutes

Recall and reading time for Oct weeks 1–2 · decisions and next steps

#minutes#pilotShared

Just now

AI mammography pilot mid-review memo

Mid-review of September results from the AI reading pilot (Sep 1–Oct 31): one reader plus AI vs double reading.

#pilot#mammographyShared

Today 09:12

Prep for the Oct 24 pilot mid-review

Numbers to bring (Sep) · study metrics to compare · running order

#minutes#pilot

Yesterday 17:40

Oct 15 quality metrics decisions

Colonoscopy quality metrics meeting: decisions and owners.

#minutes#qualityShared

Yesterday 10:25

Thyroid ultrasound results: draft wording

Draft wording for explaining small nodules to screened patients.

#wordingShared

Oct 15

LDCT lung screening eligibility

Eligibility aligned with USPSTF 2021 (annual LDCT, Grade B).

#lung

Oct 14

Colonoscopy ADR checklist

What to check before calculating adenoma detection rate.

#checklist#quality

Oct 14

Shared with your organization

Internal board

Share notices, procedures and screening material inside your organization.

New post

AllNewsShared filesDiscussionQuality & safetyProgramsSearch title, body, author

Posts15 posts3 posts

CategoryTitleAuthorDate

NewsMust readNew patient flow in the 3F imaging area (from Oct 20)3Screening ops10.16

Quality & safetyMust readPre-sedation endoscopy checklist v2.12Quality10.12

NewsWeekly screening volume, Oct weeks 1–31Screening ops10.17

DiscussionWhen should we hold the November journal club?Clinical research10.15

ProgramsLow-dose chest CT package update (target: Nov)Screening ops10.14

Shared filesAI reading pilot: September results2Clinical research10.08

Quality & safetyColonoscopy ADR, Q3 resultsQuality10.06

Quality & safetyEndoscope reprocessing logs go digital (from Oct 12)Infection control10.05

Papers

Literature from Viore

Find papers

AllReviewsOriginal

Search title, text, author

Library13 items

OriginalArtificial intelligence-supported screen reading versus standard double reading in the MASAI trialAI-assisted mammography reading · Lancet Oncol 2023;24:936–944Lång K et al. · 2023.08

OriginalArtificial intelligence for breast cancer detection in screening mammography in SwedenAI + one reader vs double reading · Lancet Digit Health 2023;5:e703–e711Dembrower K et al. · 2023.10

OriginalReduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screeningLow-dose CT lung screening · N Engl J Med 2011;365:395–409NLST Research Team · 2011.08

ReadingNotes 0SaveAlphadoc

‹ 1 / 2 ›Abstract

Pick a paper from the list to read it here

Artificial intelligence-supported screen reading versus standard double reading in the Mammography Screening with Artificial Intelligence trial (MASAI)

Lång K et al.

PublishedLancet Oncology · 24(8):936–944 · 2023TypeOpen access

Abstract

Exams with an AI risk score of 1–9 were read by one radiologist, and score 10 by two. Against standard double reading, cancer detection was 6.1 vs 5.1 per 1,000 and recall was similar, 2.2% vs 2.0%. Screen-reading workload fell by 44%.

Ask Alphadoc

Never miss the evidence.

Internal documents, your notes, and the latest medical literature all start in the same box. Pick what Alphadoc should draw from, and keep the conversation going, grounded in your sources.

What should we check?

When do we report a serious adverse event in a trial?

Investigators report within 24 hours

Investigators report a serious adverse event to the sponsor within 24 hours of learning about it.SAE reporting SOPInternal board · Clinical operationsSAE reporting SOPClinical operations · 2 days agoInvestigators report serious adverse events to the sponsor within 24 hours of becoming aware of them.

The sponsor reports suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions (SUSARs) to the MFDS.

Death or life-threatening within 7 days of learning about it, with follow-up within 8 more days
All other cases within 15 daysSafety information policy

2 sources

Ask Alphadoc, or type @ to add a sourceWhen do we report a serious adverse event in a trial?

SourcesSources: Internal board

Every possibility, at a glance.

Your notes, your internal board, and the guidelines and papers Viore keeps current, all in one place. One workspace makes it all possible.

Evidence chat

Choose your sources first.

Pick all materials, the latest medical sources, your own files, or the internal board from the Sources menu. Need one specific document? Just type @.

Notes

Write the note. Let Alphadoc organize it.

Drop meeting notes into the side panel, and Alphadoc sorts out decisions and to-dos, then adds them to your note. Keep notes private or share them with your organization.

Internal board

Your organization's standards become evidence.

Post notices and documents by category, with read receipts and comments. Open any post and ask Alphadoc about it.

Guidelines & notices

Guidelines and official notices. One place.

Viore adds and updates the guidelines for you. See each source and date at a glance, and let Alphadoc summarize any guideline.

Papers

The right paper, out of thousands.

Browse Korean and international research collected by Viore. Reading a paper? Ask Alphadoc about it in the side panel.

Favorites

Save it now. Find it later.

Keep Alphadoc's answers and the posts you check often, each in its own list.

Every moment of information, handled with clarity and care.

Alphadoc is built security-first, and runs just as well in a separate cloud as on your corporate network.

Lightweight

Tuned for medicine to run lighter and faster, so efficiency keeps improving while costs stay low.

One-way

A one-way learning architecture. Your institution's data isn't used for training, and it doesn't leave.

Zero Trust

We're building checks into every input, every path, and every response.

Where you need it, how you need it.

Alphadoc comes as a personal cloud, an organization cloud, or an install on your corporate network. For organizations, Viore sets up a dedicated environment for each one.

Personal cloud

A separate cloud for each person

Coming Soon...

Get in touch

Personal cloud includes:

Evidence chatAnswers grounded in your files and the latest medical sources.
NotesTurn meeting notes into decisions and to-dos.
Guidelines & noticesAdded and kept current by Viore.
PapersRead Korean and international research and ask as you go.
Favorites

Organization cloud

A separate cloud for each organization

Quote on request

Based on number of users

Everything in Personal cloud, plus:

Evidence chat+ grounded in internal documents and the board
Notes+ shared with your organization
Internal boardPost notices and documents, with read receipts.
A separate cloud for your organizationSet up by Viore. No servers of your own.
Organization-level securityZero Trust
Your data isn't used for training
No external AI
One-way updates for guidelines, literature and models

Corporate network

Installed on your corporate network

Quote on request

Based on users and your infrastructure

Everything in Organization cloud, plus:

Built on your networkViore installs Alphadoc inside your corporate network.
No external data transferDocuments, questions, answers and notes stay on your network.
Built to fit your infrastructure

Organization plans are quoted by number of users and your infrastructure.

Adoption and partnership inquiries

Viore's first linearity. Start here.

Adoption and partnership inquiries

biz@vioreai.com

Partners

Coming Soon...

Recognitions

NVIDIA, the NVIDIA logo, and NVIDIA Inception are trademarks and/or registered trademarks of NVIDIA Corporation in the U.S. and other countries.