Peer Review & Record Analysis

Independent specialist evaluation of medical records and case files. Written opinion delivered. No testimony required — this is evaluation only.

Request a peer review All services
Board-certified specialists
Evaluation-only engagement
Written opinion delivered
Confidentiality guaranteed
The Service

Two distinct tools. One service category.

Peer review and record analysis are often requested together but serve different purposes. Understanding the distinction helps you request the right service for your case stage and litigation strategy.

Peer Review
Was the standard of care met?
A peer review asks a specialist to evaluate clinical decisions, treatments, or omissions against the applicable standard of care. The reviewer produces a written opinion — favorable or unfavorable — on whether the care provided was appropriate. The physician does not testify and is not disclosed to opposing counsel.
Record Analysis
What do the records actually show?
A record analysis is a detailed forensic review of all case documentation — medical records, prior expert reports, billing records, diagnostic imaging, treatment notes — with the goal of identifying key facts, inconsistencies, gaps, or evidence that supports or undermines the claims at issue.

Both services produce written deliverables and involve no courtroom presence or disclosure obligation. They are frequently used as a preliminary step before committing to a full expert witness engagement — and often run concurrently when both a clinical opinion and a records overview are needed.

"The strongest expert witness engagements begin with a clear understanding of what the records support. Peer review and record analysis give you that foundation before the search begins."

Criterion matches peer reviewers and record analysts to your case by specialty, sub-specialty, and the specific clinical or evidentiary questions at issue. A general surgeon reviewing a neurosurgical standard of care question is not a match. We source reviewers with directly relevant experience.

How It Works

From case submission to written opinion

The process is straightforward and typically completed within the turnaround window agreed upon at intake.

Submit your case and records
Use the case intake form to describe the matter, identify the specialty area, and note the specific question you need addressed — standard of care, causation, consistency of treatment, damages documentation. Transmit your records securely through our intake process.
Specialist matching
We identify a board-certified specialist whose current practice or academic role is directly relevant to the clinical question at issue. Sub-specialty fit matters — we do not match by broad specialty category alone.
Review and analysis
The specialist reviews your records and produces a written opinion. Turnaround varies by case complexity — standard review is typically 5–10 business days. Rush turnaround is available on request. Criterion tracks progress and manages communication.
Written opinion delivered
You receive the written opinion through secure delivery. If the opinion is favorable and you wish to retain the reviewer as a testifying expert, Criterion can facilitate that transition. If not, the reviewer's identity remains undisclosed.
What You Receive

Deliverables for every peer review engagement

  • Written specialist opinion
    A structured written opinion addressing the specific clinical or evidentiary questions identified at intake. Favorable and unfavorable findings are both disclosed — you receive the full picture, not a curated one.
  • Standard of care assessment
    For peer review engagements, the opinion directly addresses whether the care provided met, fell below, or exceeded the applicable standard of care for the specialty and jurisdiction at issue.
  • Records summary and key findings
    For record analysis engagements, a structured summary of the records reviewed, identifying key clinical events, documentation gaps, inconsistencies, and facts that are material to the case theory.
  • Recommendation on expert engagement viability
    Based on the review, the specialist provides a candid assessment of whether the matter warrants full expert engagement, what specialty the testifying expert should hold, and what the case's strongest evidentiary points are.
  • Reviewer's credentials on request
    Reviewer credentials are available if you choose to transition the engagement to a testifying expert relationship. Identity remains confidential unless and until you make that decision.
When to Use This Service

The right stage for peer review and record analysis

These services are most valuable earlier in the case lifecycle — before significant expert spend is committed — but remain useful at any stage where an independent clinical perspective is needed.

  • Pre-litigation screening — evaluating whether a potential client's claim has merit before intake, without committing to a full expert engagement.
  • Early case strategy — understanding what the records support before deciding on a theory of liability, damages approach, or settlement position.
  • Defense evaluation — obtaining an independent opinion on the strength of plaintiff's expert position or the clinical accuracy of their claimed standard of care departure.
  • Settlement leverage — obtaining a favorable written opinion to support damages negotiations without the cost and disclosure requirements of a retained testifying expert.
  • Expert preparation — using a record analysis to identify what the testifying expert will need to address, what weaknesses opposing counsel will target, and where the records create risk.
  • Second opinion — obtaining an independent review when you have concerns about the quality or direction of an existing expert's analysis.
  • High-volume plaintiff firms screening large case inventories where not every file warrants a full expert engagement upfront.
Service Comparison

Peer review vs. full expert engagement

Understanding when each service is appropriate helps you allocate expert spend efficiently.

 
Peer Review / Record Analysis
Expert Witness Engagement
Purpose
Evaluate the case on the merits; inform strategy
Testify at deposition and trial; support case theory
Disclosure to opposing counsel
Not required — reviewer identity stays confidential
Required — expert is disclosed and subject to deposition
Typical timing
Pre-litigation, early case, or anytime a fresh opinion is needed
Before expert disclosure deadline; tied to trial schedule
Cost relative to full expert
Significantly lower — no deposition or trial preparation fees
Higher — includes preparation, deposition, and potential trial time
Can transition to full engagement?
Yes — if the review is favorable, Criterion can facilitate the transition
N/A
Related Services

Peer review works well as a standalone service, but is frequently used alongside these to build a complete case picture.

Start an Expert Search →
When your peer review produces a favorable opinion, transition directly to a full expert witness search for the same specialty.
Independent Medical Examinations →
Combine a records review with an independent physical examination for a complete clinical picture of the plaintiff's condition.
Bill Review →
Pair a clinical peer review with a bill review when both the standard of care and the reasonableness of charges are disputed.

Ready to request a peer review?

Submit your case details and records. A Criterion specialist will confirm the right reviewer and turnaround timeline within 1 business day.

Request a peer review View all services