NewMissing Records Detection: flags every visit, provider, and date missing from the file. See how →
HomeSolutionsOccupational Disease Record Review
OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE RECORD REVIEW

There is no accident date. The onset date has to be built from the record.

Occupational disease record review services build the exposure and onset timeline a repetitive stress or occupational disease claim turns on: the job duties and exposures the record documents, the first complaint on that body part, and every treating contact since, each cited to its page. Causation stays with your experts.

Click any row → the source page it cites
Exposure and onset timeline · Case #IME-4812 documented
Adams, Timothy · claim file
342 pp / 2 packets received logged
11 duplicate pages removed free
p.140 — wrong patient quarantined
Pages 342 Documents 27 Cited 100%

Work-relatedness has a written test, and the clock starts at onset.

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 occupational disease claims the standard is the state’s own definition of a compensable disease, and the referee is the judge who applies it to a date you have to prove.

The standard and the referee
The rulebook
  • The forum state’s occupational disease statute, which defines a compensable disease as one arising out of and peculiar to the employment, and which sets the notice and limitations clock running from onset or from discovery rather than from an accident
  • The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, in the edition the state has adopted, which fixes how the resulting impairment is rated
  • 29 CFR §1904.5, the OSHA determination of work-relatedness, and the employer’s OSHA 300 log entries made under it
  • NIOSH criteria documents and the published exposure limits for the agent at issue, which are what an industrial hygiene or causation expert works from
The referee
  • The workers’ compensation administrative law judge, who decides work-relatedness and the date of onset on the medical record in front of them
  • The treating physician and the state-appointed or party-retained evaluator, whose impairment ratings under the adopted Guides edition are compared against each other
  • The carrier’s claims examiner, who denies on a late notice or a pre-existing degenerative finding before the case reaches a judge
A limitations defense won on an onset date nobody had pinned down From 10¢ to as low as 5¢/page here, duplicates free
Exposure and onset timeline · Case #IME-4812 cited 100%
Packet342 pp / 2 packets · 11 deduplicatedlogged
First documented complaintEarliest mention of the body part or symptomcited
Documented exposures and dutiesEvery description in the medical recordcited
Degenerative findingsPrior imaging and age-related findingsflagged
Timeline delivered · cited 100% · no causation opinion
How it works

3 steps between the claim file and the timeline.

01

Send the claim file

Treating records, occupational health and employer clinic notes, imaging, prior records, any industrial hygiene reports, and the OSHA log entries if you have them, in any format.

02

We return the timeline, page-cited

The first documented complaint with its date, every job duty and exposure the medical record describes, the treatment course since, and every degenerative or pre-existing finding.

03

Your expert opines

Whether the disease arose out of the employment, and what the onset date is, are expert and judicial questions. The timeline is what both are argued on.

The boundary, in writing

A timeline of the record, not an opinion on work-relatedness.

We assemble and cite what the providers and the occupational health record document. We do not opine that a condition is work-related, fix the legal date of onset, rate impairment, or apportion between work and degeneration. Those belong to your physicians and evaluators.

In the demo case, page 140 turned out to belong to a different patient. In an occupational disease file that error moves a prior degenerative finding onto the wrong claimant, so it is quarantined rather than folded quietly into the history.

Audit trail · Case #IME-4812 exportable
08:12Packet received · 342 pp / 2 packetssystem
08:3111 pages deduplicatedsystem
08:44p.140 flagged — wrong patientsystem
08:54Exposure and onset timeline complete · timeline delivered · cited 100%system
09:20Exposure and onset timeline reviewed · citations verifiedreviewer
09:26Exposure and onset timeline exported · hearing packet assembled by counselreviewer
Every access logged · file deleted 30 days after delivery
Why Medrecords AI

The rules the platform never breaks.

Medrecords AI 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

7 capabilities behind every exposure and onset timeline.

The exposure and onset timeline is one deliverable of the same platform that reads, sorts, and cites the whole record.

Medical Records OCR

Every page read in full, including the employer clinic notes where the first complaint usually sits.

IN ACTION · 342 pp / 2 packets → 27 documents, read in full

Medical Chronology

Years of scattered contacts assemble from their own dates, so onset reads as a documented point rather than an estimate.

IN ACTION · first complaint → current treatment, one continuous timeline

Verifiable AI Citations

Every entry links back to its page, including the degenerative findings the carrier will lead with.

IN ACTION · timeline → cited 100%

Medical Summary Reports

It exports into the hearing packet or expert referral in your format.

IN ACTION · timeline → hearing packet

Medical Record Deduplication

Forty charts pulled from multiple practices and EHR migrations carry their share of duplicate visit notes. Each is matched and collapsed to one canonical record, so the prescribing pattern is read once per real encounter.

IN ACTION · 40 charts → duplicate visit notes collapsed to 1 record each

Missing Records Identification

A prescribing pattern read across 40 charts is only as sound as the file behind it. When a chart references a visit, refill, or referral that never made it into the production, the gap is flagged before the pattern goes to the board.

IN ACTION · prescribing pattern cross-checked → gaps flagged before submission

Cross-Exam Simulator (beta)

A board investigator or defense counsel builds a case from the chart abstraction. This beta tool maps the questioning a physician facing that hearing is likely to face on the gaps and pattern in their own record. A rehearsal tool, not legal advice.

IN ACTION · prescribing pattern → likely hearing questions mapped (beta)
FAQ

Occupational disease record review, answered.

We report the earliest documented complaint on that body part, with its date and page, and every later contact. We do not declare the legal date of onset. That is decided by the judge under the state statute, and it is usually the whole fight.

We place both in front of you: the exposures and duties the record describes, and every degenerative or age-related finding, each cited. Apportionment between them is a medical opinion for your treating physician or evaluator.

Those run on their own rulebooks and have their own pages. This one is for state occupational disease and repetitive stress claims, where the statute rather than a federal schedule defines what is compensable.

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 one 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.