Top 5 Features to Look for in Pharma Proofreading Tools

In regulated industries, like pharmaceuticals, fast-moving consumer goods, and medical marketing, accuracy is non-negotiable. Whether you’re preparing a product leaflet, packaging design, or regulatory submission – even a minor error can lead to costly delays, recalls, or non-compliance.

As teams turn to digital tools to streamline their document review processes, proofreading software has become a must-have, but not all solutions are created equal.

Here are the top 5 features that pharma teams say they need most from their proofreading tools in 2025, and why they matter in real-life workflows.

1. AI-Powered OCR

Legacy OCR (Optical Character Recognition) engines often struggle with the complexity of real-world pharma documents – whether it’s scanned artwork, unusual fonts, or multilingual content. Instead, modern AI-powered OCR does more than “read”, it understands context and structure, reducing false positives and surfacing real issues. For pharma, this might mean catching a missing dosage instruction. For FMCG, spotting a mistranslated allergen label.

What should you look for?

1. AI-trained OCR engines (not just standard OCR).
   Why this matters: Significantly reduces irrelevant alerts, so reviewers can focus on critical issues.
2. High accuracy across formats (PDFs, scans, packaging files).
   Why this matters: Ensures accurate comparisons even with scanned proof or non-standard formatting.
3. Fast processing for large and/or complex documents.
   Why this matters: Saves time during high-volume reviews like batch packaging or international leaflet versions.

Pro tip! If you’re still manually verifying OCR outputs, it’s time for a smarter approach.

2. Native XML Input Support

For teams working with structured content, such as labeling, PIM, or regulatory submissions, XML is the standard. Pharma teams rely on SPL XML for FDA submissions, while FMCG may need XML for product information management (PIM) systems. But many tools require XML to be converted into flat PDFs, risking formatting errors and added manual steps.

Software that can compare XML files directly helps preserve data integrity and streamline reviews.

What should you look for?

1. Support for XML-to-XML and XML-to-design file comparison.
   Why this matters: Maintains regulatory-critical structure throughout the review process.
2. Preservation of metadata and structural integrity.
   Why this matters: Avoids errors introduced during format conversion.
3. Compatibility with labeling and content management systems.
   Why this matters: Speeds up comparison of structured data across systems, reducing manual checks.

So, if you’re using a tool that doesn’t support XML natively, you may be missing key validation steps.

3. Built-in Compliance & Audit Trails

In life sciences and pharma, it’s not enough to say your content was reviewed; you need evidence. In pharma, FDA auditors expect to see who approved each label change. In FMCG, retailers often request full revision histories for packaging. In other words, audit trails, reviewer accountability, and e-signatures are must-haves for regulatory compliance.

What should you look for?

1. Automated, tamper-proof audit logs.
   Why this matters: Enables seamless regulatory audits with full traceability.
2. Role-based access control and user permissions.
   Why this matters: Ensures that only authorized personnel can review or approve changes.
3. Electronic signature support (21 CFR Part 11 readiness).
   Why this matters: Removes the need for paper signatures, reducing admin overhead and keeping workflows digital and compliant.

Tools built for pharma should never compromise on traceability.

4. User-Friendly Interface (UX Matters)

Powerful features don’t mean much if the tool is too complex to use. Teams under pressure, like Regulatory Affairs, QA, or Medical Review, need software that’s intuitive, fast, and accessible across roles.

What should you look for?

1. Minimal training required for new users.
   Why this matters: Faster onboarding for new or rotating team members.
2. Clear and guided workflows along with smart defaults.
   Why this matters: Better adoption across cross-functional teams (marketing, labeling, compliance).
3. Modern interface with customizable views.
   Why this matters: Reduced reliance on technical support or power users.

In a recent customer survey, 4 out of 5 users said they felt confident using InformaIT’s Content Compare, and most reported getting up to speed quickly.

5. Flexible Comparison Types: Text, Graphics, Spelling, and More

Regulatory content isn’t just about text – visuals, layouts, and language all carry compliance weight. Your proofreading tool should handle textual, visual, and spelling validation in one workflow.

What should you look for?

1. Multi-layer comparison: text, graphics, layout, and more.
   Why this matters: Ensures visual consistency across packaging, branding, and claims.
2. Integrated spell check with industry-specific dictionaries.
   Why this matters: Catches errors in translated content, artwork, or final production files.
3. Support for different file types (artwork, packaging, translated content).
   Why this matters: Consolidates what would otherwise be multiple manual reviews into one efficient workflow.

Choose a Tool That Matches the Complexity of Your Workflow

Modern pharma content isn’t simple, and your proofreading tool shouldn’t be either. From native XML handling to AI-powered OCR and built-in compliance, the right features make a measurable difference in speed, confidence, and compliance.

If your current tool is holding you back, or if you’re still relying on manual review steps, it may be time to upgrade.