Every proposal has a source.
Keep the relevant documentation and rule behind a proposed decision visible to the reviewer.
Systems remain authoritative. Access, data handling and action permissions are assessed for each practice before a live pilot.
| Route | Intended use | Boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Supported APIs / FHIR | Approved clinical and document access | Read access does not establish billing writes, claim submission or remittance access. |
| Permitted browser workflows | Approved portal tasks where interfaces are insufficient | Requires authorized credentials, session/MFA stops, duplicate prevention and monitored recovery. |
No universal EHR compatibility or live connection to every vendor is claimed. A verified system-by-system connection matrix is required before publishing named integrations.
Keep the relevant documentation and rule behind a proposed decision visible to the reviewer.
Identify the rule, source and date used. Explicit checks constrain model-assisted interpretation.
Missing evidence and unresolved decisions go to a qualified person or stop before action.
Repository engineering describes clinic-bound provenance, source identity checks, constrained credentials, separate storage and explicit access/session stops. Controls must be verified in the actual deployment.
These are onboarding requirements, not claims of completed contracts or certification. No SOC 2, HITRUST or HIPAA certification is asserted.
Start with your practice’s real bottleneck and a clearly defined pilot.
Request a workflow assessment →