Care manager, chronic-care program
A deterioration prioritized
Day 35
Weekly score rises.
Day 36
Patient at top of morning worklist.
Day 36
Call made; note recorded.
Day 60
Clinician reviews context at encounter.
Illustrative · synthetic data
Health systems & hospitals
Connect electronic health records with longitudinal patient information
Connect clinical information with longitudinal treatment and patient-generated data for research and appropriate healthcare workflows. A shared timeline preserves source context for professional review.
Patient · encounters and betweenIllustrative
EncountersContinuous record with Clarrio.ai
The challenge
Care teams see patients at encounters, not in between
Health systems hold rich clinical records, but those records are built from encounters. Between visits, patients' symptoms, home readings and adherence go unrecorded, and care teams must decide who to contact with little information. Remote data that does arrive often lands outside the EHR, adding work rather than reducing it.
Toggle the chart to compare what a visit-based record shows with what the continuous record shows for the same synthetic patient.
Weekly symptom score over 120 days
Observations2
Events in periodNot visible
Events with no nearby visit3 of 3
Illustrative · synthetic data
Encounters
Snapshots only
The EHR records what happens in clinic, not at home.
Workflow
Data outside the EHR
Separate portals add logins and reduce use.
Research
Untapped asset
Longitudinal records could support research if harmonized and consented.
Longitudinal health intelligence
Clinical history, treatment and daily life in context
Align clinical observations, medication or intervention history, and daily-life context without losing source meaning. Available data and review boundaries depend on the program.
One person / one shared timeline
Illustrative research data · Synthetic demonstration
Health and disease trajectories
Fasting glucose
Treatments and interventions
Exposure · dose · reported experience
Behavior and daily life
Average daily activity
Shared time axis / weeks
Week 4 / Disease125 mg/dL · Illustrative laboratory record
Week 4 / TreatmentReview · No dose change recorded
Week 4 / Behavior29 min · Routine resumed
Separate measures and independently scaled channels; values appear in their own units. Temporal alignment does not establish causality.
Implementation
Interoperability designed around clinical workflows
- 01
Deploy via Mayo Clinic Platform
Or directly through EHR and cloud partners.
- 02
EHR-native integration
Via Epic and Oracle Health, handled by our engineers.
- 03
Enroll patients
Patients join through the engagement app.
- 04
Trajectories in workflow
Clinicians and care managers see between-visit insight.
- 05
Population insight
Executives see trends, research and partnership opportunities.
- EHR-native via Epic / Oracle Health
- Deployable via Mayo Clinic Platform
- Sovereign-cloud compatible
Products used
Patient App, Intelligence, and Platform for connected health data
Clarrio Patient App
A patient engagement app with configurable condition profiles.
Explore this workflowClarrio Intelligence
Patient- and population-level summaries for clinicians and care teams.
Explore this workflowClarrio Platform
Dashboards, cohort views, EHR integration and APIs.
Explore this workflowBenefits
How longitudinal data supports research and care workflows
- Between-visit insight inside the clinical workflow
- Prioritized outreach for care managers
- A data asset for research and partnerships
- Low integration lift for IT
Benefits in practice
Benefits and evidence needs across stakeholder roles
Hospitals & health systems
Connect the encounter to a follow-up process with an owner
An encounter record captures what happened in the service, not every aspect of life afterwards. A patient may face a device problem, a reporting burden or uncertainty about who will respond. More incoming data will not resolve those problems unless the service defines review responsibility, contact pathways and the boundary between routine follow-up and urgent care.
01
Choose the service window
Define the patient group and between-encounter questions the team can realistically review.
02
Add patient context
Use scoped Patient App reports alongside available records and home observations; review source gaps in the Platform.
03
Close the handoff
Prepare a source-aware summary for the responsible team and use the service's established follow-up and escalation procedures.
For the professional team
Clinicians can review the interval before an appointment; care managers can distinguish a stopped data feed from an unanswered report. Operational leaders need to understand who performs that review and what workload it creates. Clarrio.ai should be scoped alongside the existing system of record, not assumed to replace it.
For patients, members and caregivers
Patients can share everyday experience without having to reconstruct an entire interval at the next encounter. They also need clarity about response times, access support and what to do when urgent help is needed. A non-digital participation pathway matters for people whose devices, connectivity or circumstances make remote reporting difficult.
For payers and program funders
For a funded follow-up service, evidence should describe both reach and the service delivered. Reporting activity is not a readmission outcome, and a more complete record is not proof of lower utilization. Any comparison of service use needs linked outcome data, appropriate follow-up and a credible design.
- Pre-visit context
- Dated patient reports and available home observations
- Coverage review
- Source interruption distinguished from an unanswered report
- Handoff question
- Named review responsibility and the next service conversation
Workflow illustration · not a customer result or live record
What to evaluate before making a claim
Review reach, reporting burden, follow-up completion and staff workload alongside the service's intended outcomes. Examine participation across relevant patient groups so an apparently successful digital pathway does not conceal unequal access.
Explore evidence and evaluationPayers & health economics
Distinguish richer patient context from evidence of value
Claims and encounter datasets can describe recorded utilization without fully capturing function, experience or the practical burden of a program. Patient reports add a different perspective, but they can be incomplete or drawn from a population unlike the members covered by a payer. The task is to establish whether those observations are suitable for a specific appraisal question, not to turn engagement into a savings claim.
01
Define the appraisal question
Specify the relevant covered population, decision, comparator where needed and evaluation horizon.
02
Assess data suitability
Review provenance, participation, measurement windows and missingness before examining results.
03
Build the evidence account
Combine appropriately governed patient experience with relevant clinical or utilization evidence; document assumptions and limits for expert appraisal.
For the professional team
HEOR and population-health teams can examine how reported experience varies across the observation period and which groups are represented. A useful output explains the denominator behind a measure and the observations excluded from analysis. Governance must also define the permitted purpose of any linkage to payer-held data.
For patients, members and caregivers
The member perspective should remain visible in a program evaluation: burden, everyday function, access and what participants consider meaningful. Reporting should not become an unexplained condition of receiving services. Explain the collection purpose and permitted uses in a way members can understand.
For payers and program funders
Decision support means an inspectable evidence package, not an automatic reimbursement verdict. Include the target population, relevant baseline differences, data sources, follow-up and limitations. Cost and utilization conclusions need appropriate data and analysis; neither can be inferred from app activity or observation coverage.
- Decision context
- Population, appraisal question and evaluation horizon
- Suitability account
- Provenance, completeness, accuracy and relevance
- Interpretation boundary
- What the analysis can support and what remains uncertain
Workflow illustration · not a customer result or live record
What to evaluate before making a claim
Separate program participation, patient-reported experience, clinical outcomes and economic endpoints. Define each before collection, use an appropriate comparison where the question requires one and examine whether findings transfer to the covered population.
Explore evidence and evaluationPatients, members & caregivers
Give the person contributing data a meaningful place in the workflow
A person can complete many questions without understanding why they are being asked or who will read the answers. Device observations may look precise while missing personal context. A useful longitudinal journey starts with the person's priorities and makes the reporting purpose, burden and review arrangements understandable.
01
Explain the purpose
Agree what the care or research program needs to learn and what participation involves.
02
Capture lived experience
Use appropriate reports alongside available observations; distinguish the patient's own answers from caregiver observations.
03
Bring context to review
Discuss a dated interval with the responsible professional, including what is missing and what matters to the person.
For the professional team
Teams gain context for a more specific conversation, but should not assume that a missed report means a person disengaged. Accessibility, fatigue, language and connectivity may affect reporting. Define support and review arrangements before introducing new questions.
For patients, members and caregivers
Patients and members can keep a dated account of experiences they might otherwise forget. Caregivers can contribute observations when appropriately scoped, without replacing the person's own perspective. Personal patterns invite discussion; they are not instructions or proof that a particular routine produced an outcome.
For payers and program funders
A program's apparent reach can hide who could not participate. Payers and commissioners should examine access, reporting burden and representativeness alongside outcome evidence. Patient experience is an important perspective in appraisal, not a shortcut to an economic conclusion.
- Personal context
- The person's own priorities and dated reports
- Reporting perspective
- Patient answer or appropriately identified caregiver observation
- Review arrangement
- Who reviews reports, when and through which contact pathway
Workflow illustration · not a customer result or live record
What to evaluate before making a claim
Ask whether reporting is understandable, manageable and meaningful. Examine completion alongside accessibility and support needs. A high completion rate alone does not show that people feel heard or that a program has improved their health.
Explore evidence and evaluationWhat each stakeholder receives
Longitudinal data outputs by stakeholder role
Clinicians
- Patient trajectories between visits
Care managers
- Prioritized outreach lists
Executives
- Population insight
- Research and pharma-partnership revenue
IT
- Low-lift, EHR-native integration
- Sovereign-cloud compatible
Patients
- An engagement app that stays with them
Product workflow
How the record is built, step by step
Select a step to see what happens. Sources are captured through the Patient App and integrations, harmonized on the Platform and summarized by Intelligence.
Sources
- EHR (Epic / Oracle Health)
- Patient App
- Home devices
- Labs
- Claims
Clarrio.ai workflow
Outputs
- In-workflow summary
- Care-manager worklist
- Research dataset
Stakeholder outputs
Role-specific views of the longitudinal record
Each role receives a different view of the same longitudinal record. Values are synthetic.
Care manager
Morning worklist
Patients ordered by recent change, with the reason and the source shown.
Clarrio.ai / Morning worklistSynthetic
- Patient H-104DeterioratingSymptom score up 4 this week
- Patient H-322Missed meds3 doses unlogged
- Patient H-210No dataNo sync in 10 days
Clinician
EHR summary
A between-visit summary appears in the clinician's existing workflow.
Clarrio.ai / EHR summarySynthetic
- Since last encounter3 eventsWith dates
- Home readings42Trended
- Patient-reportedWeeklyCompleted 9 of 10
Research office
Research asset
Consented, harmonized longitudinal records available for approved studies.
Clarrio.ai / Research assetSynthetic
- Consented patients1,120Research consent
- Data modelFHIR / OMOPHarmonized
- AccessGovernedPer approved protocol
Worked examples
Two illustrative scenarios
Research office
From care to research
Month 0
Research consent captured in app.
Month 6
Harmonized dataset available.
Month 7
Approved study accesses cohort.
Illustrative · synthetic data
Evidence
Evidence status and research review boundaries
Mayo Clinic Platform review
Joined Mayo Clinic Platform's Solutions Studio; participation is not clinical validation.
Research-specific ethics review
Required approvals depend on the research protocol and responsible institution.
Evidence status
Patient counts, observation periods and evidence reviews are stated per study.
Not a medical device
Clarrio.ai does not diagnose, treat, or replace clinical judgment.
Therapeutic areas
Therapeutic areas for longitudinal data collection
FAQ
Questions about health systems & hospitals
Also see Longevity & preventive health and Pharma & biotech.
Request a demo
Explore disease, treatment and behavior together
Explore how clinical, treatment and behavioral information align around your program and the research or review questions your team needs to answer.
Book a demo
Opens the Calendly booking page in a new tab.
Prefer to write first? Send an inquiry and the team will reply.