NewMissing Records Detection: flags every visit, provider, and date missing from the file. See how →
HomeSolutionsSettlement Administrators
Medical record review for settlement administrators

Tier claims by injury. At MDL scale.

For mass tort settlement administrators, Medrecords AI reads the medical record behind every claim form — so injury tier, exposure window, and qualifying criteria get decided the same way across thousands of claimants.

Claimant batch · organizing review-ready
4,200 files → tiered by injury criteria
612 pp avg per claimant, deduplicated & indexed
Qualifying diagnosis — cited to pathology report, p. 118
Built for the docket, not just the file.
The status quo
205,540 lawsuits pending across 162 active federal MDLs
one settlement matrix, thousands of files to score against it
inconsistent tiering is what reopens a settlement to challenge

Open a referral that's already organized.

Everything the exam needs — structured, surfaced, and sourced. Medrecords organizes the referral, builds the chronology, and drafts the history with citations, so your time goes to the evaluation and the opinion.

IME report · from your templateQME-104
p.31 p.212 p.640

Custom reports: your letterhead, your voice

Report templates draft the history and records review with inline citations. You add the findings and the opinion. Export clean, in your format, every time.

Chronology · by date
2019Prior injury · lumbar strain, pre-DOI
Feb 11Date of injury — ER visit
May 22MRI — Lumbar imaging placed inline
Jun 01Gap in care · 47 days
Jul 17Orthopedic consultation

Automated chronology: the history in order

Prior injuries, treatment, imaging, and gaps — every event dated, sourced, and in sequence. The whole medical history scannable before the claimant walks in.

Duplicate sets · 4Match similarity
Ambulance Call ReportmultipleReview
Consultation Report84%Review
Progress Note87%Review
Remove all duplicates

Dedup & indexing: shrink the packet first

Referral packets arrive bloated with duplicates and misfiled pages. Medrecords removes the redundancy and indexes what remains — so you read each page once.

Cross-checked · multi-modelReferral #M-2210
Claimant nameJane Doe
Date of injury2024-02-11
DiagnosisLumbar disc herniation
Prior injury2019 lumbar strain
Treatment to datePT ×12 · ESI ×2

Built to be verified — not just believed

Multiple models cross-check every extraction. Each field carries its citation and a confidence score, and low-confidence pulls are flagged, so your verification is a click, not a re-read.

Adapts to each referral

Built for expert-level decisions.

Contradictions, diagnostic inconsistencies, prior injuries: surfaced with citations, scored for confidence, and left for you to weigh. The judgment stays yours.

See the full IME workflow, capability by capability →
Intake · Case 2025-0412 reading — p. 1,462 / 1,847
PDF ED_records · 214 pp DOC ortho_chart · 1,128 pp JPG nurse_note · flagged
Multi-model read · dedupe · claimant split · index
1,847 pp in 612 unique 14 flagged One DICOM study
Organized recordby provider · date
01Jul 17Medical Records
02Jul 17Imaging Reports
03Aug 06Physician Notes
612 pp indexed · every row citedopen the case →

Surface the clinical details that change opinions

Contradictions across providers, diagnostic inconsistencies, and key clinical events — highlighted on the timeline and cited to the page, so you analyze instead of search.

You make the calls — always

AI does the reading, every line stays reviewable and traceable, and verification is one click to the source. The findings and the opinion remain yours. As they should.

Who this is for

You're the expert. Reading shouldn't be the job.

Claims administrators and review teams scoring thousands of claimant files against a settlement matrix's medical criteria.

Contradictions and diagnostic inconsistencies highlighted with sources
Records oriented by provider, facility, and date at a glance
More files per week, with the same clinical rigor
Records review · file 3 of 9 today panel-ready
Dx: cervical radiculopathy — progress notep.212
EMG negative — 6 weeks laterconflict · p.388
Prior claim, same body part — 2021p.63
ROM measurements — all visits, comparedtable
Contradictions found for you — conclusions stay yours
The objection

“Can this handle criteria that change across settlement tiers or amendments?”

Yes — qualifying criteria are configurable per matrix, and every file re-scores against the current version, cited to the record.

Built for the defensible tier.

Who we serve

One platform. Built for everyone who works the file.

The same defensible, cited record, shaped to how each team reads it: the case, the claim, or the exam.

Not sure which fits? Talk to us about Enterprise
FAQ

Settlement Administrators, answered.

Yes — claim forms and medical records are processed together into one claimant file.

Each diagnosis is scored and cited independently against matrix criteria.

Ask for a benchmark against a sample batch — turnaround scales with average file size, not just count.

CONTENT HUB

The Content Hub covers medical-legal record review across IME and QME, workers’ compensation, personal injury, disability and life underwriting, mass tort, and payer integrity. Free, no login.

Browse the Content Hub

Send a sample batch.

Read the tiered, cited output. Then decide.