AI medical record analysis you can cross-examine.
"Question the whole record in plain English; every answer cited."
Prior injuries, treatment gaps, causation support — ask the 10,000-page file directly and get answers linked to the exact page or DICOM slice they came from. Conflicting statements are flagged with both citations. Threads persist with the case.
Yes — a 2019 lumbar strain appears in the intake form p.412 and is referenced in a 2021 PCP note p.1,388. The ER intake denies prior back pain conflict · p.214.
From question to verified answer.
Pipeline“Any prior injuries before the DOI?” — no query syntax.
10,000+ pages and the imaging, searched at once.
Every claim linked to its page or slice — conflicts flagged.
Open the source, confirm, drop it in the file.
Interrogation, not search.
"Any prior injuries before the DOI?" — asked of the whole record at once, not one document at a time.
Answers link to their source page or DICOM slice. Verify in one click before it goes in the file — zero uncited claims, by design.
When the ER intake denies what the PCP note records, the contradiction is flagged — with both citations, side by side.
Track lab values, work status, or medication changes across any date range — charted from the record, cited per point.
Every interrogation is saved to the case and shareable with the team — the associate's question is the partner's head start.
Interrogating the record is part of the workspace, not a metered add-on. Ask until you're satisfied.
The Q&A spec sheet.
Ask™10,000+ pages plus imaging, queried in one question.
Page or DICOM slice — verify in one click before it goes in the file.
Contradictory statements surface with a citation on each side.
Labs, work status, medications — plotted across any date range.
Saved across sessions, shareable across the team.
Part of the workspace — not a token meter.
The questions each team asks.
Same record, different interrogation — the Q&A adapts to the lens.
"What supports causation?" — depo prep with page cites attached.
For law firms"Any prior injuries?" — answered before opposing counsel asks it.
For PI firmsScreen a case for merit in an afternoon, with citations to hand off.
For LNCs"Treatment consistent with the mechanism?" — asked per claim, cited per answer.
For insuranceAI medical record Q&A, answered.
3 ways. Scale: consumer chat tools reject files anywhere near full case size; it queries the entire indexed record — 10,000+ pages plus DICOM imaging. Defensibility: every answer carries citations to the exact page or slice, and conflicts are flagged with both sources. Privacy: files are processed under a signed BAA with HIPAA controls and are never used to train a model.
The ones that decide cases: "Any prior injuries before the date of loss?" "Where are the treatment gaps?" "What supports — or undercuts — causation?" "How did work status change after the surgery?" Plus factual retrieval: medications, providers, diagnoses, ICD codes, specific visit details.
Because uncited answers aren’t allowed. Every claim links to its source page or DICOM slice, an evaluation framework scores each output, and low-confidence responses are flagged rather than delivered as fact. You verify with one click, not a re-read.
Yes. It can plot values across date ranges — hemoglobin across a hospitalization, work restrictions across a claim, medication changes across a course of treatment — with each data point cited to the record it came from.
No. Your data is processed under a signed BAA, encrypted in transit and at rest, access-controlled at the case level with PHI access logging — and never used to train any model.
No. Q&A is part of the case workspace, not a metered add-on. Teams that price per question train their reviewers to stop asking — which defeats the point of having the record answer at all.
Ask your file the hard question.
Bring the question you'd normally spend a day answering. Handled under our BAA; never used to train a model.