Before you subscribe to another AI record review platform,
read what the output actually looks like.
One platform produced more than 4,500 pages of output from 1,424 pages of source records. Another generated a wrongful death summary describing two children the decedent never had. A third confirmed completing a four-step review—then asked the attorney to re-upload the records and re-explain the instructions. It had no memory of the session.
These are not hypotheticals. They are documented outputs from platforms currently marketing themselves as replacements for physician review—platforms promising to eliminate the need for human oversight entirely.
AI-assisted review, directed and verified by a physician, is faster and more thorough than linear review alone. The issue is not the tool. It is unverified output used without independent clinical oversight—and the professional exposure that creates for the attorney who relied on it.
Read the full case study with platform-by-platform breakdowns →Three output PDFs—two of them identical reformats of each other. A liability analysis applied to standing orders forms. The attorney who paid for efficiency received a document that required as much time to navigate as the original records.
A wrongful death case where the platform invented two children who did not exist—because the decedent was young and married, and the model filled the gap with what it statistically expected. The error appeared in the damages section with the same confidence as every accurate finding.
15 to 20 pages. What happened, what went wrong, who the defendants need to be, who to depose, what records are missing, what the defense is likely to argue, what the but-for damages are. A document an attorney can act on—not navigate.
and what only a physician can do.
$4,000 to $7,500 to learn the case does not exist.
Testifying expert review typically runs $400 to $500 an hour. A complex records review—a full obstetric record, a surgical complication, a sepsis case with a prolonged hospitalization—can easily run 10 to 15 hours before a single opinion letter is drafted. If the expert's opinion comes back that the applicable clinical practice guideline supports what the provider did, the attorney has spent that money to learn what a guideline-informed pre-screen would have identified at consulting rates, in a fraction of the time, before the retainer was signed.
In the cases where a guideline governs, the standard of care is a specific document, from a specific organization, applicable to a specific year. Identifying it before the expert retainer is signed is the difference between a retainer that confirms your theory and one that tells you the case does not exist.
Read: The Clinical Guideline That Could Make or Break Your Case →A 15-20 page document an attorney can act on—not navigate.
Physician-directed analysis: what happened, what went wrong, who the defendants need to be, who to depose, what records are missing, what the defense is likely to argue, what the but-for damages are.
Request a Consultation