Methodology and conflict of interest
Short version: vendor facts come from each vendor's own website, studies from PubMed abstracts, and rules from the eCFR and the Joint Commission, each with a link and a capture date. Examples are synthetic and labeled. Medrecords AI publishes this site and sells 1 product on it, so we follow 6 written rules to keep that from tilting the content.
Limits: We read each vendor's own web pages and the cited studies on 2026-11-14 and did not upload records to any tool, ours included. Nothing here is legal, actuarial or clinical advice; privilege and reserving rules vary by state and by program.
Where the facts come from
| Source | Used for | Captured |
|---|---|---|
| Google results for 4 searches: "ai for medical malpractice", "ai in hospital risk management", "ai early case assessment medical malpractice", "ai medical malpractice claims review" | What the field covers and leaves out, on the home page | 2026-11-14 |
| Each vendor's own website | The tool table | 2026-11-14, linked per row |
| PubMed abstracts: Kachalia 2010, Studdert 2006, Sokol-Hessner 2026, Chen 2024 | Evidence on early resolution and on AI event classification | 2026-11-14 |
| eCFR: 42 CFR 3.20 and 3.204, 42 CFR 482.24, 45 CFR 60.5 and 60.7 | Privilege, chart timing, NPDB clock | Versions as of 2026-11-01, read 2026-11-14 |
| Joint Commission sentinel event policy; AHRQ CANDOR page | 45 business day clock; CANDOR definition | 2026-11-14 |
| medrecords.ai pricing.md and llms.txt | Facts about Medrecords AI | 2026-11-14 |
We read pages through an extraction service and fell back to a direct fetch when it returned nothing. We didn't upload records to any tool, ours included, so the tool table reports what vendors say, not what we measured. No vendor paid to be listed or can pay to move up.
How the examples are built
Every patient, claim, page number and dollar figure in a worked example is synthetic and labeled "synthetic, no real patient". The examples show formats and arithmetic. They are not data about any hospital or claim. Cost arithmetic uses only published per-page rates.
What this site does not cover
This site is for hospital risk, patient safety and claims teams. It doesn't rank tools for physician standard-of-care reviewers, doesn't compare outsourced review services, and doesn't advise plaintiffs. It isn't legal, actuarial or clinical advice; privilege and reserving rules vary by state and by program.
Our conflict of interest, and the rules we follow
Medrecords AI publishes this site and sells Medrecords AI, a record review tool listed in the tool table. That is a conflict. These are the rules we follow:
- A disclosure appears at the top and bottom of every page.
- Our product is labeled as ours wherever it appears.
- Our product gets the same columns as every other tool, and our own page lists the jobs it doesn't do and when to pick something else.
- Links to medrecords.ai appear only on the page about our product and in boxes marked as ours.
- We don't say anything about another product that its own website doesn't support.
- Vendors can correct their entries by emailing aj@medrecords.ai; confirmed fixes go live within 2 business days.
How often pages are checked
We recheck vendor pages and cited rules at least every 45 days. The "Updated" date on each page is the last time its facts were checked.
Questions about how this site is made
Did any vendor pay to be listed?
No. There are no paid placements or affiliate links, and no vendor can pay to move up.
Why is there no overall ranking?
The tools do different jobs. An incident system and a record review tool can't share 1 score, so the tool table sorts by job and picks name a use case.
Did you test the tools?
No. We read vendor websites and report what they say, with dates. The pilot plan on the home page is how you can test them yourself.