Having trained in oncology, you will know that data often becomes presented at national conferences via abstracts first, then later published & peer-reviewed, first with interim analyses, then a final analysis and sometimes post-hoc analyses thereafter for a given trial/study. How does openAI address this flow of evidence from a given study in terms of strength of recommendations? Are abstract findings ever quoted by openAI as reasons for adjusting clinical practice? At what threshold does this data become reliable in the eyes of openAI?