Medical chronology software for litigation & claims teams
A medical chronology that cross-examines the claim against the medical records.
Waypoint reads the full record and builds a chronology shaped by what you need to know about the case. Every entry is verified against the source, and every claim is one click from its page.
Patient reports gradual onset of lower back pain over several weeks; denies history of trauma or acute injury.
Coastal Orthopedic Associates — Dr. R. Haines, treating physician
Built for scrutiny
Built for scrutiny, whichever side you're on.
Most medical chronology tools are built to move a file fast. Get a demand out the door, close an intake queue. That's fine until the chronology has to hold up to something harder: an adjuster who's read the same file, an expert being cross-examined on it, a judge deciding whether it's admissible, opposing counsel testing whether your causation theory actually holds. Waypoint is built for that moment, not just the moment before it. Whether you're proving a theory or taking someone else's apart.
Who relies on waypoint
How it reads the record
You define the questions, Waypoint answers them
Before Waypoint touches the record, you tell it what the matter is actually about and which questions need answering: a causation dispute, a pre-existing condition, a gap in treatment, a damages question. The same file is organized differently depending on what you're defending, because you're not getting a generic extraction, you're getting answers to the questions you asked.
How it tests your theory
Test the theory before opposing counsel does
This is the part most chronology tools don't do, on either side of a case. Give Waypoint a hypothesis: the incident caused the injury, or it didn't; treatment was interrupted for unrelated reasons, and it answers in two layers: a plain-language narrative response, fully cited, that reads like a memo answering your question, backed by Provenance, a ranked list of every supporting and contradicting quote from the record, each independently verified and bookmarked to its source page.
- A single relevant line isn't lost in thousands of pages of records; it surfaces in the answer.
- Source and citation detail survive the whole process, not just the first pass.
- The evidence isn't graded by the same model that wrote the answer. Several precision- and recall-focused methods cross-check each other, and Provenance emerges from that, not from one model reviewing its own work.
The record offers mixed support. A 2019 note documents a similar complaint in the same region (Ex. 9, p. 44), but imaging taken after the incident shows an acute change (Ex. 14, p. 212) absent from the earlier film.
How it verifies
Every entry checked before it reaches you
Waypoint runs a verification pass on its own output, comparing each extracted claim back against the source text before delivery. Where the record is ambiguous or an extraction can't be confirmed, it's flagged in red, not quietly smoothed over.
How you check it yourself
One click from claim to page
Every entry links directly to the exact page it came from, we call it Provenance. Before you cite a fact in a brief or rely on it in a deposition, you can confirm it yourself in seconds instead of re-reading the file to find where a date or diagnosis actually appears. The links travel with the chronology into whatever format you export.
Patient denies history of trauma at the initial evaluation, consistent with the treating physician's note.
How you narrow it down
Cut the record down to what the motion needs
Filter and cull by provider, date, document type, facility, or treating versus referring physician. Build a targeted excerpt for a summary judgment motion or a deposition outline in minutes, instead of re-reading a file you've already been through twice.
How we validate accuracy
Waypoint tests it three ways, not one
Against experienced reviewers
Waypoint's output is benchmarked against attorneys reviewing the same file by hand, so we know where it agrees with the people who'd otherwise be doing this work themselves.
Against every other approach, at scale
Waypoint runs large-scale comparisons against other extraction methods across a much bigger set of records, so results hold up beyond a small number of hand-picked test files.
Against itself, repeatedly
The same record is passed through Waypoint multiple times to catch the kind of run-to-run inconsistency most vendors never check for, because a chronology that changes each time you generate it isn't one you can defend.
Trust & Compliance
The record you're handling deserves this
Independently audited, so your security review has an answer on day one.
Built around the standard this data already has to meet.
Data stays in US-based infrastructure, full stop.
You control how long records are kept, up to a one-year default maximum.
Pricing
Priced the way case teams actually staff up
No subscription, no per-seat licensing. You pay for the records you actually run.
Not gated by seats. Bring in as many people on a matter as the matter needs.
Product improvements roll out by default. No separate upgrade contract to negotiate.
How it works
From record to defensible chronology
Upload the record
Any format, any volume. Waypoint handles scanned and handwritten files, EHR exports, and mixed-provider record sets the same way it handles clean digital ones.
Define the matter
Tell Waypoint what you're pursuing and which questions need answers: the issues, the theory, and what actually matters in the case.
Review and verify
Every entry is checked against its source and flagged if it can't be confirmed. Provenance is generated automatically alongside the chronology.
Filter, cull, export
Narrow the chronology to what a motion or deposition needs, and export it with the source links intact. Usually minutes to hours, not days.
See how Waypoint handles a record like yours.
Send a redacted sample or bring one to the call. We'll build a matter-specific chronology from it while you watch, and test a hypothesis on the spot.
Request a demo