How it works Practice areas Methodology Get in Touch
Integrated Network Consulting

INC reads the medical record as one connected system.

Counsel uses INC Forensic's evidence-based methodology to surface the contradictions, gaps, and causal pathways that live between documents — across providers, time, and modalities — sourced and ready for the retained expert.

INC Forensic tiers.

Five deliverables, scaled to what counsel needs.

Tiers 1–3 · Automated · Counsel-driven
01

Chronology

A clinical timeline of the medical record, source-cited and organized by domain. The foundation a retained expert builds from.

02

Narrative Assessment

Connects the dots across causation, medical necessity, mitigation, and differential diagnosis — organized analytical material the retained expert uses to form independent clinical opinions.

03

MEA

Medical Evidence Analytics. Surfaces patterns, relationships, and inconsistencies across the entire record corpus for counsel's review — used for case strategy and witness preparation.

Tiers 4–5 · With clinical engagement
04

Diagnostics

Multi-modal TBI diagnostic testing — cognitive, limbic, autonomic, visuomotor, vestibular. Integrated domain testing with intrasubject design and statistical analytics. Engaged through INC's clinical network.

05

Consulting

Direct polytrauma consultation. Neither treater nor testifying expert — a consultant who guides counsel through the pathways and data tracks of complex cases. Includes Glassbox data extraction with statistical analytics and graphical exhibits.

In development MedSight second-read advanced imaging analysis.

The facts of the case exist within the interdependent network.

Where the record is dense, the timeline is contested, and the diagnostics span multiple specialties.

CASE TYPE 01

Traumatic brain injury

The most network-dependent injury category in litigation. Overlapping, interdependent systems, with years of treatment and evaluations.

Cognitive Limbic Autonomic Visuomotor Vestibular Somatic Endocrine Sleep
CASE TYPE 02

Polytrauma

Multi-system injuries that fragment across disciplines, mapped as a single picture.

Orthopedics Neurology Endocrine Psychiatry Physiatry Chiropractic Physical Therapy
CASE TYPE 03

Motor vehicle collisions

From soft-tissue claims to catastrophic brain injuries — from mechanism of injury to permanent disability outcomes.

Acute imaging Long causation tail Pre-existing
CASE TYPE 04

Medical malpractice In development

The most record-intensive category of all — where the providers in the record are themselves the question. We're building INC's medical-malpractice analysis now and onboarding sponsoring experts and design-partner firms.

INC maps the sequence across providers and time; the standard of care remains the expert's to decide.

Provider analysis Timeline sequencing Standard of care

Become a design partner →

1 / 4

A stress-test for treating providers.

Counsel isn't the only audience for network-level analysis. Clinicians use INC too. It supports clinical judgment; it never replaces it. INC surfaces documentation gaps, missed correlations, and weak points. The clinician weighs each through their own reasoning and decides what, if anything, to do about it.

Documentation audit

INC surfaces gaps, unsupported claims, and timeline inconsistencies opposing counsel could later exploit. The clinician reviews each flag through their own clinical reasoning and decides whether and how to address it.

Treatment-plan validation

INC surfaces where the documented record diverges from the intended course of care, the kind of gap that invites a challenge at deposition. Whether a divergence matters, and what to do about it, is the clinician's call.

Pre-disclosure review

Before a report is produced, INC pressure-tests it against the underlying record so nothing gets contradicted on cross. INC surfaces; the expert decides. Every clinical opinion remains the expert's own.

From records to evidence-ready analysis.

A documented four-stage workflow. Same inputs, same methodology, same outcome — every time.

Stage 01Records assimilated
Full record set in any format — scans, OCR, clinical PDFs, mixed-quality materials, hospital portal exports. INC ingests the corpus as a single matter.
Stage 02Data points identified
Every entity, event, finding, and treatment identified, classified, and source-cited — each datum pinned to its originating page. No orphan claims, no derived assertions without provenance.
Stage 03Networks mapped
Findings connected across time, providers, and modalities. Causal pathways, treatment trajectories, and contradictions become visible because the record is read at once, as a system.
Stage 04Evidence revealed
Source-traced analysis with full citation for every claim. Timelines, contradiction registers, network visualizations — a structural argument, not a chronology and not a summary.

MEA methodology.

An evidence-based analytical methodology grounded in peer-reviewed clinical and forensic literature. MEA deciphers the validity of the arguments — the patterns, the relationships, the inconsistencies that decide complex cases.

Symptoms
Patient reports
Diagnostics
Tests & imaging
Observations
Physician notes
Treatments
Interventions
Outcomes
Results
01

Cross-temporal analysis

How findings evolve across the full treatment arc — surfacing patterns that span years that no single encounter reveals.

02

Injury progression mapping

How the injury developed and was documented — and the moments where the record diverges from the claimed timeline.

03

Contradiction detection

Conflicting evidence, questionable treatment choices, documentation gaps. Errors and weaknesses identified prior to depositions and cross-examinations.

INC Forensic vs. linear review.

INC reads the record all at once — as one connected system, not a stack of documents.

Linear review

Document-by-document
  • Documents reviewed one at a time
  • Chronologies that miss what doesn't sit on the same page
  • Organized by date or source
  • Cross-record relationships go unseen
  • Scales poorly with complexity

INC Forensic

Network-level analysis
  • The entire dataset analyzed as a relational network
  • Relationships, causal pathways, and patterns mapped
  • Inconsistencies and contradictions surfaced
  • What the record contains, regardless of who reads it
  • Scales with complexity, not against it

INC reads the record.
It does not pick a side.

A single case may engage INC from any seat — and the analysis returned is the same. What surfaces are the facts in the record and the relationships between them. The conclusions drawn from those facts, and the strategy built on them, belong to the engaging party.

Plaintiff counsel
Defense counsel
Treating provider
IME clinician

Defensibility is the architecture,
not a disclaimer.

Evidence-based

Methodology grounded in peer-reviewed clinical and forensic literature, built to the Daubert and FRE 702/703 standard for expert evidence.

Reproducible

Same record, same methodology, same conclusions — every time. A contained, proprietary system, not a general-purpose LLM.

Source-traceable

Every claim cites the underlying record page and the supporting references. Nothing in the analysis lives without a source.

Used by experts

A tool used by qualified experts. It does not testify. It does not diagnose. It supports the expert who does.

Built for objectivity

The same structural reading regardless of who engages it. Counsel determines how the analysis applies to the case.

INC Forensic analyzes evidence the way opposing counsel will — examining how findings connect across the entire record to identify vulnerabilities before they become liabilities.

The intelligence is
in the network.

INC surfaces conflicting evidence, poor logic, documentation gaps, errors, and case weaknesses for counsel — early, prior to depositions and cross-examinations. An early understanding of the injury terrain is essential to strong case management and rehabilitation.

Request a sample analysis Methodology white paper
Phone
800-688-1183
Email
info@INCforensic.com