Medical record review prompts for life care planners

Medical record review prompts for life care planners look forward where the rest of record review looks back. They extract every documented recommendation for future care with its frequency and duration, the unperformed surgery, the equipment mentions, and what the record does not yet establish.

By Ahmed Jemaa, Co-Founder & CEO of Medrecords AI · Published 8 Sep 2026

The job

Project what care the person will need going forward, for how long, and at what cost, on a record foundation that will survive challenge.

Produces

A life care plan with cost projections.

Spine priority

S9, S11, S12, S13. Lighter on the spine than any other lane, because this lane looks forward where the rest looks back.

Run order

The four spine prompts, then C1 through C6 to gather the foundation, then C7 for projection inputs, then C8 to identify what must be obtained before the plan can be written.

The prompts

Run these after the spine prompts marked priority above. Placeholders in angle brackets need filling in.

Future care recommendations

Extract every documented recommendation for future care. For each: the recommendation verbatim, recommending provider, specialty, date, stated frequency, stated duration, and citation. Separate recommendations stated as necessary from those stated as optional or conditional.

The foundation of the plan. The verbatim requirement matters because "may benefit from" and "will require" are different recommendations and they get cross-examined differently.

Current functional status by domain

Establish current documented functional status across mobility, self-care, activities of daily living, cognition, and work capacity. Cite the most recent documentation for each domain and give its date.

The dates are the point. A functional status established three years ago is not current, and the plan has to say so.

Equipment and modification needs

Identify every mention of assistive equipment, durable medical equipment, orthotics, prosthetics, home modification, vehicle modification, or attendant care. For each: what was mentioned, by whom, date, whether it was recommended or already provided, and citation.

The recommended-versus-provided distinction drives both the replacement schedule and the question of whether the item belongs in the plan at all.

Pending surgical and procedural recommendations

Identify all surgical or procedural interventions recommended but not yet performed. For each: procedure, recommending provider, date recommended, stated indication, any stated timeline, and citation.

A pure absence-as-finding prompt. The unperformed recommendation is often the largest single line in a plan and it appears nowhere in an extraction-shaped review.

Ongoing medication regimen

Identify medications documented as ongoing or expected to continue indefinitely. For each: medication, indication, prescriber, current dose, and any documented statement about expected duration.

Permanency and impairment

Extract every provider statement regarding permanency, impairment rating, expected duration of restriction, or prognosis. Quote verbatim with citation and date. Report if none exists.

Pair with S12. Permanency and MMI are related and distinct, and plans get challenged where the two are treated as one.

Projection inputs

Extract the record facts needed for cost projection: date of birth or age, current age, occupation, and any provider statement about expected duration of care or life expectancy. Flag each item the record does not establish.

The flag is what you take to the referring attorney.

Record insufficiency for planning

Identify what this record set does not establish that a life care plan requires: absent specialty evaluations, absent functional capacity evaluation, absent statements on duration or permanency. Present as a list of what to request.

Lane failure mode: the confident partial. A plan built on a record set missing the physiatry file or the functional capacity evaluation will read as complete and be wrong in its largest numbers. C8 and S4 run first, not last.

Professional responsibility. A plan projects from documented recommendations rather than generating them. Where the record does not support a projection, the honest move is to obtain the evaluation, not to reason to the number. C7 and C8 exist to make that boundary visible. Cost data comes from your own sourcing and is outside the scope of record review entirely.

Lane failure mode: the confident partial

A plan built on a record set missing the physiatry file or the functional capacity evaluation will read as complete and be wrong in its largest numbers. C8 and S4 run first, not last.

Professional responsibility

A plan projects from documented recommendations rather than generating them. Where the record does not support a projection, the honest move is to obtain the evaluation, not to reason to the number. C7 and C8 exist to make that boundary visible. Cost data comes from your own sourcing and is outside the scope of record review entirely.

Issues to raise, not answers. Requirements vary by jurisdiction, and none of this is legal advice.

Run these on a file you already have

Send one real record set. You get back a cited chronology, and you review it, you revise it, you sign it.

Test a file · Book a demo

Last verified: 2026-09-08 · ← All 71 prompts