# Treating Physician Causation Foundation > Record foundations for treating-physician and expert causation disclosures: the cited chronology behind a Rule 26 disclosure, built before the Daubert motion. Canonical page: https://medrecords.ai/solutions/treating-physician-causation-foundation/ --- New — **Missing Records Detection:** flags every visit, provider, and date missing from the file. [See how →](https://medrecords.ai/product/missing-records-identification/) [Home](https://medrecords.ai/) ›[Solutions](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/) › — Causation Record Foundation TREATING PHYSICIAN CAUSATION FOUNDATION ## The opinion is the doctor’s. The record under it should be complete. Treating physician causation foundation services assemble the cited record an expert disclosure has to rest on: mechanism of injury, prior condition, treatment course and every document the physician reviewed, each linked to its page. The opinion, the methodology and the signature stay with the physician who gives them. [Test a file ](https://medrecords.ai/test-a-file/?src=treating-physician-causation-foundation) [Book a demo](https://medrecords.ai/demo/) Click any row → the source page it cites Record foundation · Case #IME-4812 documented Adams, Timothy · expert review file 342 pp / 2 packets received logged 11 duplicate pages removed free p.140 — wrong patient quarantined Pages 342 Documents 27 Cited 100% ### The disclosure rule is published. So is the judge who 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 expert causation disclosures, both are already published. The standard and the referee The rulebook - Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B), which requires a retained expert’s written report to state the facts and data considered, not merely the conclusions reached - Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C), the shorter disclosure for treating physicians, which still requires the subject matter and a summary of the facts and opinions - Fed. R. Evid. 702 as amended in December 2023, which requires the proponent to show by a preponderance that the opinion reflects a reliable application of the method to the facts of the case - Fed. R. Evid. 703, which governs when an expert may rely on facts and data not themselves admissible The referee - The trial court at a Rule 702 hearing, which excludes an opinion whose factual basis the record does not support - The court on a motion to strike, which limits a treating physician to the opinions actually disclosed under Rule 26(a)(2)(C) - Opposing counsel at deposition, who asks the expert which records they reviewed and which they did not An expert struck for an opinion the reviewed record did not support From 10¢ to as low as 5¢/page here, duplicates free Record foundation · Case #IME-4812 cited 100% Packet — 342 pp / 2 packets · 11 deduplicated — logged Records reviewed — Indexed as a disclosable list — cited Prior condition — Pre-incident treatment for the same body part — cited Gaps in treatment — Intervals with no documented care — flagged Foundation delivered · cited 100% · no causation opinion How it works ### 3 steps between the file and the disclosure. 01 #### Send everything the expert will review Pre-incident and post-incident records, imaging reports, therapy notes and the incident documents, in any format and any order. 02 #### We return the foundation, page-cited A chronology, a prior-condition section, a reviewed-records index and a gap list, each entry linking to the page it came from. 03 #### The physician forms the opinion They read the foundation, apply their own method, and write the report they will sign. Causation is theirs, and the record under it is complete. The boundary, in writing ### A foundation for the opinion, never the opinion itself. We organize and cite what the records document. We do not form or draft a causation opinion, select a methodology, apportion between accident and pre-existing disease, or state that any injury was caused by any event. Rule 702 puts that burden on the expert, and it stays there. In the demo case, 11 duplicate copies were removed before review. An expert who reads the same operative note four times has not read more of the record, and the reviewed-records index says so honestly. Audit trail · Case #IME-4812 exportable 08:12 — Packet received · 342 pp / 2 packets — system 08:31 — 11 pages deduplicated — system 08:44 — p.140 flagged — wrong patient — system 08:54 — Record foundation complete · foundation delivered · cited 100% — system 09:20 — Record foundation reviewed · citations verified — reviewer 09:26 — Record foundation exported · Rule 26 disclosure prepared by counsel — reviewer 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 ### 7 capabilities behind every record foundation. The record foundation is one deliverable of the same platform that reads, sorts, and cites the whole record. [ #### Medical Records OCR Every page the expert will be asked about, read in full: prior treatment, imaging reports, handwritten therapy notes, nothing skipped. IN ACTION · 342 pp / 2 packets, read in full ](https://medrecords.ai/product/ocr/) [ #### Medical Chronology The chronology builds itself, so prior condition and post-incident course sit on one timeline instead of in two piles. IN ACTION · pre-incident → current care, one timeline ](https://medrecords.ai/product/chronology/) [ #### Verifiable AI Citations If we cannot cite it, it is not in the foundation. Every line links to its page. IN ACTION · foundation → cited 100% ](https://medrecords.ai/product/citations/) [ #### Medical Summary Reports The reviewed-records index exports straight into the Rule 26 disclosure in your format. IN ACTION · index → Rule 26 attachment ](https://medrecords.ai/product/summaries/) [ #### 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 ](https://medrecords.ai/product/medical-record-deduplication/) [ #### 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 ](https://medrecords.ai/product/missing-records-identification/) [ #### Cross-Exam Simulator A board investigator or defense counsel builds a case from the chart abstraction. This 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 ](https://medrecords.ai/product/cross-exam-simulator/) FAQ ### Causation record foundations, answered. No. We assemble the cited record the report rests on. The facts and data considered, the method applied and every opinion expressed under Rule 26(a)(2)(B) are the expert’s work, and the signature on the report is theirs. No. It shows what the records document and when, including prior treatment for the same body part and any gaps in care. Whether those facts establish causation is a Rule 702 question for the expert to answer and the court to weigh. It is the first thing opposing counsel asks about at deposition. An index that names every document by date and source, and cites the pages, lets the expert answer precisely instead of estimating, and it drops straight into the Rule 26 disclosure. 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. [Test a file ](https://medrecords.ai/test-a-file/?src=treating-physician-causation-foundation) [Book a demo](https://medrecords.ai/demo/) [See every case type we process →](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/case-types/) ### More solutions - [**400 narratives, one house style, and a submission date.** — Patient narratives for deaths, serious adverse events and discontinuations, drafted to the ICH E3 clinical…](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/csr-patient-narrative-drafting/) - [**45 days to a credible RCA. Most of it goes to assembly.** — Chart, policy and device-log assembly for root cause analysis and sentinel event review, page-cited and…](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/sentinel-event-rca-record-review/) - [**45 days, one indexed packet, 1 narrative that maps to the coverage criteria.** — ADR response support for TPE, UPIC, SMRC and RAC audits: indexed record packets, signatures and orders located…](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/medicare-audit-response/) - [**5,000 pages of employment and exposure history, in order.** — Record and employment-history review for EEOICPA Parts B and E claims. Exposure chronology, dose reconstruction…](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/eeoicpa-claim-review/) - [**60 days from the answer, and the specialty has to match.** — Page-cited record review for New Jersey affidavits of merit under N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-27 — the file read in full…](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/new-jersey-certificate-of-merit/) - [**60 days to certify. However many pages the chart runs to.** — Page-cited record review for Pennsylvania Rule 1042.3 certificates of merit — the file read in full before a…](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/pennsylvania-certificate-of-merit/)