Read it like an MD reviewer
A medical record is eighty to six hundred pages of multi-author free text. The contradictions across notes, the codes that miss the documentation, the absent findings: knowable only if you read it all. Owl reads the whole thing, walks the guideline, and writes a determination an MD can defend.
100%
Records read end-to-end
92%
Concordance with downstream IME
14×
Reviewer throughput
Three AI agents on every medical file. Reading what the team can’t read all of.
Pick a line. See how Owl reads the chart, walks the guideline, and writes the determination.
Same three agents, same workflow, every clinical area. The chart and the guideline change; the discipline doesn’t.
MCG ortho criteria for lumbar discectomy require: imaging, neurologic deficit, failed conservative care ≥6 wks. All three met with chart citations.
Surgeon is board-certified ortho spine; hospital is in-network; facility ASC-credentialed for procedure.
Approve. All MCG criteria for lumbar microdiscectomy are met: MRI-documented L4-L5 protrusion with corresponding radiculopathy on PE, 8 weeks of PT documented, 12 weeks of NSAID documented, 3 ESI with partial relief documented. Determination letter cites chart spans and MCG criteria sections. Cohort approval rate on this profile is 96%; appeal-overturn rate <1%. Approval letter and PA-rationale memo attached.
How Owl plugs into the medical-review bench. Same MDs, more files, every record read.
Records land
Owl reads the full chart end-to-end. Builds the chronology, the code map, the contradiction list.
Guideline walk
ODG, MTUS, Milliman, MCG, Hayes, NCCN: whichever applies. Cited section by section.
Determination drafted
Approve / deny / develop, with chart spans, guideline citations and ERISA-/state-compliant rationale.
MD reviewer signs
Reviewing MD validates, edits and signs. Owl pre-fills the determination letter and IME questions.
Appeal defense
On appeal, Owl reads the new submissions and writes the supplemental determination + reviewer rationale.
Numbers from carriers running Owl in medical review.
Built for the regulatory shape of medical-necessity review.
Lives where your medical review team lives.
UM/UR platforms
GuidingCare, TruCare, ZeOmega, MedHOK, in-house
Claims platforms
Guidewire, Duck Creek, FINEOS, Origami, Majesco
Clinical guidelines
MCG, InterQual, ODG, MTUS, Milliman, Hayes, NCCN
Medical records
MRO, Verisma, Datavant, Epic, Cerner, athena
IRO / IME
External review orgs, IME networks, physician panels
Identity & SSO
Okta, Azure AD, PingFederate, SAML, SCIM
Bring us a stack of charts. We’ll send back the determinations your MD bench would have written.
Two-week pilot. 100 records, your guidelines, your MD bench validates against your team’s ground truth. We measure concordance, cycle time, appeal-overturn rate and missed contradictions.