Skip to content
Clarrio.ai

Therapeutic area · Asthma, COPD, environmental exposure

Respiratory symptoms, treatment, and environmental context

Air quality, pollen, temperature and activity shape respiratory health between scheduled visits Clarrio.ai aligns environmental context with symptoms and treatment. Align clinical, treatment and behavioral information on one shared longitudinal timeline, where available and appropriate to the program.

What Clarrio.ai captures

  • Symptom and night-waking diaries
  • Reliever-use logs
  • Respiratory PROs
  • Air-quality and pollen indices
  • Wearable activity, sleep and heart rate
  • Spirometry and prescriptions

The evidence gap

Exacerbations start outside the clinic, often days before anyone is told

Asthma and COPD symptoms vary with season, pollution, infection and activity. A clinic visit or spirometry test captures one moment and relies on recall for the rest.

Environmental exposure research needs location-aware, consented context matched to daily symptoms: data that traditional study designs rarely capture at the right granularity.

Asthma

Reliever use and night symptoms change with pollen and pollution.

COPD

Early signs of exacerbation emerge over days at home.

Seasonal patterns

Symptom changes align with environmental shifts that are rarely recorded.

Post-infection recovery

Return to activity is gradual and hard to follow.

Daily symptom score (0–10) over 120 days

Observations2

Events in periodNot visible

Events with no nearby visit3 of 3

Two visits show controlled symptoms. The daily record shows three periods linked to environmental and infection context.

Illustrative · synthetic data

How Clarrio.ai addresses the gap

Collection, integration and analytics, designed for this area

  1. 01

    Daily symptom check-ins

    Short questions on breathlessness, cough and night symptoms.

  2. 02

    Environmental context

    Air quality and pollen indices linked by approximate location, with consent.

  3. 03

    Activity and sleep

    Wearable data as context for symptom change.

  4. 04

    Clinical linkage

    Spirometry, prescriptions and exacerbation history from records.

Data captured

Three layers of data, kept distinct

Select a layer. Exact sources depend on deployment configuration and data permissions.

Captured from patients or caregivers in the Patient App.

  • Symptom and night-waking diaries
  • Reliever-use logs
  • Respiratory PROs

Research & operational outputs

Research and operational deliverables

Symptom-exposure overlay

Symptoms aligned with air quality and activity on one timeline.

Seasonal cohort view

Symptom patterns across a cohort by month.

Exposure-outcome analysis dataset

Daily person-level variables for association analyses.

Remote coverage report

Who is contributing data, and how consistently.

Value for each stakeholder

Pharmaceutical & biotech

Real-world symptom control and exposure context for respiratory therapies.

Hospitals & pulmonologists

Symptom and reliever-use trends before each review.

CROs & academic research

Environmental exposure studies with daily granularity.

Patients

A clearer view of what affects their breathing.

Program evaluation

Where Clarrio.ai can create measurable value

These are the KPIs we agree with customers before deployment, measured against their own baseline. Data coverage, patient experience and clinical outcomes answer different questions. Higher engagement alone does not demonstrate better health or lower utilization.

Explore benefits and evidence
LeverHow it is measured
Remote data coverageDays with symptom data relative to enrolled days
Research efficiencyExposure data linked without manual matching
Follow-up completenessScheduled assessments completed

Illustrative use case

Pollen season and asthma control

Research team, illustrative

Pollen season and asthma control

  1. March

    Participants enroll; daily check-ins begin.

  2. April–June

    Pollen and air-quality indices linked to each participant's days.

  3. May

    Overlay shows symptom clusters during high-pollen weeks.

  4. July

    Daily dataset exported for association analysis.

Illustrative · synthetic data

AsthmaCOPDBronchiectasisInterstitial lung disease

Clarrio.ai has joined Mayo Clinic Platform's Solutions Studio, supporting its mission to advance interoperable, data-driven healthcare innovation. This does not imply endorsement or clinical validation.

  • Consent and data governance
  • Privacy-by-design principles
  • Role-based access
  • Flexible deployment
  • Data residency options
  • FHIR-based interoperability
  • Research-use positioning, not diagnosis

Explore Respiratory Real-World Evidence

Explore Respiratory Real-World Evidence

Evidence interpretation

Daily experience and exposure context should not be collapsed into a causal claim

Align symptom reports, activity and available environmental observations by time and source. An exposure association does not establish causation. Define the reporting window, device limitations and service review pathway before using the record in a program evaluation.

Benefits in practice

From respiratory health observations to a useful review

Pharma & biotech

Start with the evidence question a decision-maker actually needs answered

Routine records can describe encounters and prescriptions while leaving daily function, symptom burden and experience under-observed. Adding remote data can fill selected gaps, but a large dataset is not automatically decision-ready. Population selection, questionnaire suitability, exposure timing and missing observations can all change the interpretation of a longitudinal analysis.

  1. 01

    Specify the evidence objective

    Define the population, observation window, outcome concept and intended decision before selecting sources.

  2. 02

    Collect and reconcile

    Combine appropriately scoped Patient App reports with available clinical and device data in the Platform; keep reported experience separate from recorded events.

  3. 03

    Review before analysis

    Use source-aware review to inspect context and quality. Agree variable definitions, analysis methods and limitations with the study team.

For the professional team

Clinical development, medical affairs and HEOR teams can work from a common record while asking different questions. Clinical operations needs coverage by site and timepoint; an evidence analyst needs definitions and provenance; medical affairs needs an account of the population and study limitations. Those outputs should not be treated as interchangeable.

For patients, members and caregivers

Participants have a structured way to contribute the experience that encounters may miss. Questions should be meaningful, proportionate and appropriate to the population. Explain the study purpose, who reviews submissions and whether reporting receives an individual response; a research diary is not an emergency service.

For payers and program funders

A payer-facing evidence package should connect patient experience to a defined decision question and relevant population. Include baseline characteristics, follow-up, missingness and the analysis method. Patient-reported experience can complement other evidence, but it does not alone establish comparative effectiveness, economic value or a coverage recommendation.

Illustrative review brief
Population definition
Eligibility, enrollment dates and relevant baseline characteristics
Longitudinal variables
Source, units, assessment window and missing-data conventions
Evidence limitations
Selection, confounding and generalisability to the decision population

Workflow illustration · not a customer result or live record

What to evaluate before making a claim

Assess suitability against the research question: provenance, completeness, accuracy and relevance. Predefine the analysis rather than choosing a favorable pattern after viewing the results. Publication and payer use require appropriate scientific review.

Explore evidence and evaluation

Payers & 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.

  1. 01

    Define the appraisal question

    Specify the relevant covered population, decision, comparator where needed and evaluation horizon.

  2. 02

    Assess data suitability

    Review provenance, participation, measurement windows and missingness before examining results.

  3. 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.

Illustrative review brief
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 evaluation

Patients, 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.

  1. 01

    Explain the purpose

    Agree what the care or research program needs to learn and what participation involves.

  2. 02

    Capture lived experience

    Use appropriate reports alongside available observations; distinguish the patient's own answers from caregiver observations.

  3. 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.

Illustrative review brief
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 evaluation

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.