Skip to main content
Upload the medical records for a case and tell Anara which body part and injury date to focus on. Anara searches across all the uploaded reports for relevant findings, then drafts a chronological narrative paragraph grounded in what the records actually say. For medical evaluators and legal support professionals who produce written case histories from stacked documentation.

​
1. Describe the task

The medical file arrives the day before the assessment. It is three inches thick and you need to produce a narrative history for each affected body part, each one chronological, grounded in the records, and formatted for the clinical evaluation report. Reading through the full file to find every relevant mention of the left knee, across fifteen physician notes and two sets of deposition transcripts, is the work that takes hours. Anara does this pass for you. Upload the records, specify the body part and the relevant date, and Anara searches across everything you have uploaded for findings related to that body part in that time frame. It drafts a chronological narrative in paragraph format, citing each finding to its source document. If a document mentions a treating physician whose records have not been uploaded, Anara flags the gap. Each body part gets its own session. Do not mix body parts in one chat. The workflow holds for any medico-legal setting where the evaluator must produce a written synthesis from stacked records. Here a medical case analyst at a medico-legal assessment company has received a workers’ compensation file with eight physician reports and needs a narrative history for the right shoulder before tomorrow’s assessment. 
I need a medico-legal narrative history for the right shoulder. The injury date is March 14, 2022. My library contains the full medical file for this case.

Search all uploaded documents for any findings related to the right shoulder, diagnoses, imaging results, treatment notes, functional limitations, and physician opinions, that fall before and after the injury date. Draft a clear, chronological, strictly prose narrative covering the pre-injury history, the acute injury findings, and the treatment course to the present date. Do not use bullet points or headers. Cite each finding to its source document. If any physician or report referenced in the documents is not in my library, flag it at the end.

​
2. Give Anara context

Required context
  • All available medical records for the case, uploaded to your library or a case-specific folder. The more complete the record set, the more comprehensive the narrative.
Optional context
  • A note specifying the relevant injury date, the case type (workers’ compensation, personal injury, disability evaluation), and any apportionment parameters that should inform the narrative framing.
  • The reporting format expected in your jurisdiction or organization, if it differs from a standard chronological paragraph.

​
3. What Anara creates

A chronological prose narrative covering every finding related to the specified body part in the uploaded records, from earliest history through the most recent note, with each claim attributed to its source. Missing records are flagged at the end. The output is what you would produce after a thorough file review, in a fraction of the time.

​
4. Follow-up prompts

​
Draft the functional impact summary

Once the narrative is complete, summarize the functional limitations for the report. 
Based on the narrative you just drafted and the records in my library, produce a functional impact summary for the right shoulder. List five self-modifications the patient reports making to daily activities, five physical restrictions documented by treating physicians, and five occupational activities that appear incompatible with the documented limitations. Keep each item to one sentence.

​
Run the apportionment analysis

When the case requires a formal division of causation. 
Based on the records you reviewed, provide an apportionment analysis for the right shoulder. Identify the findings that pre-date the industrial injury and those that post-date it. Describe what the records say about the relative contribution of pre-existing conditions versus the industrial injury to the current clinical picture. Cite the specific passages used.

​
Check for a missing record

When a physician is referenced in the file but their report has not been uploaded. 
The narrative flagged a reference to Dr. Kaur's orthopedic evaluation from November 2022. That report is not in my library. Based on the other documents, what findings about the right shoulder from that time period are documented elsewhere that can stand in until I locate the Kaur report?

​
5. Tricks, tips, and troubleshooting

​
How you word your prompt shapes what you get

Specify the body part by name and side. Run one body part per chat. Include the injury date as the temporal anchor: without it, Anara cannot frame findings as pre-injury and post-injury, which is the framing evaluation reports require. Ask for “strictly prose, no bullet points” explicitly. Ask Anara to flag missing records at the end rather than mid-narrative.

​
Check the output against your own understanding

Anara may miss findings described obliquely: a radiology report mentioning a shoulder finding without naming the shoulder in the header may not be retrieved. After Anara drafts the narrative, check any record you know contains something important. If Anara missed it, paste the passage and ask it to incorporate the finding at the appropriate chronological position.

​
What to do with the output next

Review the draft against the source records. For any sentence where the attribution feels wrong, ask Anara to quote the exact passage so you can verify the wording before it enters the report. Once accurate, copy the narrative into your report template. Run the functional impact follow-up as a separate request so the two outputs remain independently revisable.