# Medical Board Investigation Record Review > Multi-patient chart review for state medical board licensure investigations — prescribing patterns and documentation gaps, page-cited across every chart. Canonical page: https://medrecords.ai/solutions/medical-board-investigation-record-review/ --- [Home](https://medrecords.ai/) ›[Solutions](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/) ›Medical Board Investigation Review MEDICAL BOARD INVESTIGATION RECORD REVIEW ## 40 charts, 1 prescribing pattern, every page cited. Medical board investigation record review services organize the multi-patient chart sets behind a licensure complaint. Prescribing histories, visit documentation, and standard-of-care questions are abstracted chart by chart and page-cited, so a board investigator or defense counsel can see the pattern across patients instead of reading each file cold. [Test a file ](https://medrecords.ai/test-a-file/?src=medical-board-investigation-record-review) [Book a demo](https://medrecords.ai/demo/) Click any row → the source page it cites Chart abstraction · Case #IME-4812 documented Adams, Timothy · licensure investigation file 342 pp / 2 packets received logged 11 duplicate pages removed free p.140 — wrong patient quarantined Pages 342 Documents 27 Cited 100% ### The practice act is published. So is the board that applies it. We do not build for a case type until we can name the standard that defines a correct output and the person who grades the file against it. In medical board investigations, both are already published. The standard and the referee The rulebook - The state medical practice act and the board's own regulations, which define unprofessional conduct and the documentation a licensee must keep - State controlled-substance prescribing rules and PDMP check requirements, which set what the chart must show before and during opioid therapy - The board's disciplinary guidelines, which tie a finding to a sanction range - The standard of care as testified to by the board's expert reviewer, chart by chart The referee - The board's investigator and its expert reviewer, who read the charts and write the report the board votes on - The board itself, in a public disciplinary order that is citable and appealable - The state administrative law court on appeal, where a sanction unsupported by the record can be reversed An expert reviewer reading 40 charts at hourly rates, before anyone has organized them Flat 10¢/page here, duplicates free Chart abstraction · Case #IME-4812 cited 100% Packet342 pp / 2 packets · 11 deduplicatedlogged Patient chartsAbstracted to a common structurecited Prescribing historyDrug, dose, date, prescriber per visitcited Documentation gapsVisits missing a required elementflagged Abstraction delivered · cited 100% · no standard-of-care opinion How it works ### 3 steps between the charts and the review. 01 #### Send the chart set Every patient chart under review, as produced — EHR exports, faxed notes, PDMP printouts, handwritten records, in any format. 02 #### We return the abstraction, page-cited Each chart reduced to the same structure: visits, complaints, examinations, prescriptions, and monitoring, with every entry citing its page. 03 #### Your expert forms the opinion The board's reviewer or the licensee's expert reads the pattern and states whether the standard of care was met. That opinion is theirs. The boundary, in writing ### An abstraction of the charts, not an opinion on the licensee. We organize and cite what each chart documents, and we flag where a required element is absent from a visit note. We do not opine on the standard of care, characterize conduct as unprofessional, or recommend a sanction. Those determinations belong to the board's expert reviewer and to the board. In the demo case, page 140 turned out to belong to a different patient. The abstraction flags it and quarantines it in its own line — which matters more, not less, when a single investigation spans dozens of charts. Audit trail · Case #IME-4812 exportable 08:12Packet received · 342 pp / 2 packetssystem 08:3111 pages deduplicatedsystem 08:44p.140 flagged — wrong patientsystem 08:54Chart abstraction complete · abstraction complete · 40 charts · cited 100%system 09:20Chart abstraction reviewed · citations verifiedreviewer 09:26Chart abstraction exported · investigative exhibit drafted off-platformreviewer Every access logged · file deleted 30 days after delivery Why Medrecords AI ### The rules the platform never breaks. EVERY LINE CITED CASE #IME-4812 · ADAMS, T.342 pp 2/14 — ER visit, right knee p.4 4/18 — arthroscopic surgery p.61 p.140 — wrong patient quarantined Medrecords AI Read every page · cite every line #### HIPAA, under a signed BAA Every file is handled under our Business Associate Agreement, from the first byte. #### Never trains a model Your records are never used to train any AI model — ours or anyone else's. #### Every line cited If we can't cite it, we don't say it. Every sentence links to its source page. #### Deleted after delivery Files are deleted 30 days after delivery, with a full audit log of every access. Powered by the platform ### 4 capabilities behind every chart abstraction. The chart abstraction is 1 deliverable of the same platform that reads, sorts, and cites the whole record. [ #### Medical Records OCR Every chart read in full — EHR exports, faxed consults, handwritten progress notes, PDMP printouts — nothing skipped, nothing guessed. IN ACTION · 342 pp / 2 packets → 27 documents, read in full ](https://medrecords.ai/product/ocr/) [ #### Medical Chronology Each patient's course builds itself into a timeline, so a prescribing pattern is visible across visits instead of buried in them. IN ACTION · first prescription → current regimen, 1 continuous timeline ](https://medrecords.ai/product/chronology/) [ #### Verifiable AI Citations If we can't cite it, we don't say it. Every abstracted entry links to the chart page and the visit it came from. IN ACTION · every chart entry → cited 100% ](https://medrecords.ai/product/citations/) [ #### Medical Summary Reports The abstraction formats straight into the investigative file — your template, your letterhead. IN ACTION · chart abstraction → board-ready exhibit ](https://medrecords.ai/product/summaries/) FAQ ### Medical board investigation review, answered. No. We abstract and cite what each chart documents and flag visits missing a required element. Whether the documented conduct falls below the standard of care is an expert opinion, given by the board's reviewer or the licensee's expert, and ultimately decided by the board. Yes. The deliverable is the same either way: a page-cited abstraction of what the charts contain. Both sides work from the record, and an abstraction that cites every entry is checkable by whoever reads it next. Each chart is read and abstracted separately to the same structure, then presented side by side. Documents are matched to the patient they belong to, and anything that doesn't match is quarantined rather than filed into the wrong chart. No. Medrecords AI does not retrieve records from providers or facilities. You bring the records you already have — review starts in minutes from upload. Retrieval vendors take days; you can keep yours and still cut the review to minutes. ### Send 1 file. We'll tell you what we can read. No obligation. If the case type is buildable we'll scope it; if it isn't, we'll say so. [Test a file ](https://medrecords.ai/test-a-file/?src=medical-board-investigation-record-review) [Book a demo](https://medrecords.ai/demo/) [See every case type we process →](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/case-types/)