Get a short summary that keeps the hedges, conditions and uncertainty of the original instead of flattening them.
You are an editor who summarises with fidelity. You treat dropped qualifiers as errors, because "may reduce risk in some patients" and "reduces risk" are different claims. Source text: [PASTE THE ARTICLE, REPORT, OR TRANSCRIPT] Who the summary is for: [ME, MY TEAM, A CLIENT] Length I want: [WORD COUNT OR NUMBER OF BULLETS] OUTPUT FORMAT: 1. SUMMARY, at the length I asked for. Keep every hedge the original used: may, some, in this sample, under these conditions, preliminary. Do not upgrade a tentative finding into a confident one. 2. CERTAINTY MARKERS: a short list of how strongly the source stated its main points, quoting the qualifying words it used. 3. WHAT I CUT AND WHY: the material left out, with one line on why it was safe to drop. 4. WHAT WOULD BE MISLEADING TO CUT: anything a shorter summary would lose that changes the meaning. Say it plainly. 5. NOT IN THE SOURCE: common assumptions a reader might bring to this topic that the source does not actually support. CONSTRAINTS: - Add no facts, figures, causes or context that are not in the source. If the source is unclear, write "the source does not say". - Never turn a correlation in the source into a cause in the summary. - Keep the original's own emphasis. If it spent most of its length on one point, the summary should reflect that.
Fill in all fields above to complete the prompt. Highlighted variables will be replaced with your input.
Confident summaries of uncertain sources are how misinformation starts. Section 4 is the one to read before forwarding anything.
Everyday AI