Personal injury matters involving contested causation, treatment necessity, prior conditions, medical specials, or future care may benefit from source-linked physician review before demand, mediation, expert retention, or trial.
“No causal relationship between the accident and the claimed pathology.” The most common IME conclusion in PI litigation — and the most analyzable.
“The surgery was not medically necessary given the documented conservative care.” Defense reviewers apply specific criteria for conservative care completion.
“The pathology reflects baseline degeneration unrelated to the accident.” Used most aggressively in older clients and prior injury at same level.
“The gaps in treatment are inconsistent with the claimed severity.” A 30-day gap in physical therapy is standard grounds for challenging medical necessity.
A physician-authored medical substantiation brief for counsel's demand package: objective findings, treatment course, severity, function, prior-condition differentiation, documented prognosis, missing evidence, and anticipated carrier medical objections. Medisprudence does not draft the legal demand, value damages, or make legal liability arguments.
From $750 per standard matter. Recurring-firm arrangements begin with a defined three-matter pilot so actual record burden and turnaround can be measured before any monthly capacity commitment.
Defense orthopedic, spine, and neurology IMEs deconstructed with 20+ deposition questions.
Tests the medical foundation for future services, frequency, duration, causation, duplication, and lifetime assumptions before demand, mediation, reserve, or trial.
For cases where the injury may be real, but the amount of the bills, surgery, lien treatment, or provider charges will be attacked — necessity, relatedness, coding, and reasonableness, documented.
Pre-mediation analysis of how a defense reviewer evaluates the record.
Pre-expert assessment of whether the record supports the case theory.
For spine cases with prior degeneration — maps the defense argument and what documentation addresses it.
Maps every gap using the same framework payers use to challenge medical necessity.
All seven components for high-value cases where comprehensive pre-expert analysis justifies the investment.
The same PI documentation-threshold analysis, applied for defense firms, TPAs, and carriers. Medical exposure assessment, IME quality assurance, reserve-setting support, and causation challenge analysis.
Pre-submission physician review of your defense IME — seven-defect analysis before the report is exposed to plaintiff cross-examination.
Item-by-item review of medical support, frequency, duration, causation, duplication, and contingency in serious-injury future damages.
Physician-authored medical exposure assessment for carriers and TPAs handling high-bill soft-tissue and surgical PI cases.
For high-bill soft-tissue, surgical, chiropractic, pain-management, or lien-provider claims where reserve and settlement posture depend on what portion of the specials is defensible.
Medical record vulnerability assessment for defense settlement strategy and mediation preparation.
How strong is the plaintiff's medical case? Where is it most vulnerable? Same CVA methodology, defense framing.