Clinical Workspace
Do you ever feel you're holding too many possibilities in your head at once?
A calm, structured second look at the case in front of you.
Instead of holding every possibility in your head, see it laid out: what fits, what doesn't, what is still missing and what must not be missed. Choose a specialty and the sections you want, answer the follow-up questions, and read the Full Report as it is written. Then explore, check, edit and keep the result. Everything it produces is a draft for a qualified healthcare professional to review.
Follow-up questions
Do you ever wonder if there was one more question you should have asked?
The questions the history left open, before every Full Report.
Lithaya first takes a look at the case: a first clinical impression, the conditions it is weighing, and a few questions to confirm or rule them out and check for red flags, each with its reason. Answer what you know and select Continue. With no answers, Continue writes the report without them.
- Unanswered questions stay undocumented; they are never assumed negative
- A strip above the report shows how many were answered; Review answers reopens them
- A changed answer turns the button amber: Update report writes the next version, with what changed and the sections marked “updated”
- One set of questions per case: they change only when the case text or specialty changes
Example output · fictional case
Do you ever wonder what else this could be, and what argues against it?
A Differential Diagnosis that shows its reasoning.
Each condition comes with its fit with the case, what in this case supports it and argues against it, key alerts, symptoms, findings, risk factors, what tells it apart, first-line management, the tests usually considered and the outlook: twelve columns, with the condition always in view as you slide. Conditions that must not be missed are marked, however limited their fit.
Case: a 72-year-old man with type 2 diabetes is found confused and sweating, two weeks after starting glipizide and after two days of eating little; capillary glucose is 38 mg/dL.
| Condition | Likelihood (fit with case) | For (this case) | Against (this case) | Key Alerts | Key Symptoms | Commonly Reported Clinical Findings | Risk Factors | Differential Indicators | Literature First-Line Management | Tests Usually Considered | General Prognostic Overview |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sulfonylurea-associated hypoglycemiaClinical Impression | Strong | glucose 38 mg/dL, new glipizide, poor intake | — | can recur for many hours | sweating, tremor, confusion | low glucose, tachycardia | older age, kidney impairment, missed meals | clear improvement once glucose is normal | oral or IV glucose, then observation | repeat glucose, creatinine | good if treated, may recur |
| SepsisMust not miss | Limited | recent cold, heart rate 104 | no fever documented | can cause low glucose and confusion | fever, malaise, confusion | tachycardia, low blood pressure, raised lactate | older age, diabetes | confusion persists after glucose corrected | early antibiotics, fluids | temperature, CBC, lactate, cultures | depends on early treatment |
| Acute kidney injury | Limited | two days of poor intake | creatinine not documented | prolongs the glipizide effect | low urine output, fatigue | raised creatinine | dehydration, older age, NSAIDs | raised creatinine | fluids, review medicines | creatinine, electrolytes | usually reversible |
| Acute ischemic strokeMust not miss | Weak | acute confusion at 72 | no focal deficit | low glucose can mimic stroke | sudden weakness, speech change | focal neurological deficit | hypertension, diabetes, atrial fibrillation | deficit persists with normal glucose | urgent stroke pathway | neuro exam after glucose, CT head | time-dependent |
Watch · 2 minutes · fictional case
Want to see how it works on a real case, start to finish?
See a full case, start to finish.
A narrated recording of the Clinical Workspace: confirm professional use, choose the specialty and the report sections, and enter the case. Full Report gives a first look and follow-up questions; two are answered and the report is written. Then the differential, red flags, tests, medication reference and sources, the Explorer, an analysis focused on one condition, History, the Editor, an export that asks you to confirm your review first, and the case saved and found again.
19 report sections
Do you only need part of a report for this patient?
Pick what this case needs.
Specialty presets choose a sensible starting set, and you can build your own specialty with the sections you use most. The Clinical Impression and Differential Diagnosis are always included.
Reference Workspace
Clinical Impression · Differential Diagnosis · Red Flags & Serious Conditions to Consider · Information to Clarify · Tests to Consider · Medications Listed · Medication Reference & Interaction Checks · Clinical Management Considerations · Referral Considerations · Follow-Up & Safety-Netting Considerations
Clinical Insights
Clinical Pearls · Associated Conditions & Comorbidities · Evidence & Further Reading
Draft Clinical Documents
Draft SOAP Note · Draft History & Physical · Draft Progress Note · Draft Referral Letter · Draft Discharge Summary · Patient Education Draft
Quick Summary gives a short overview instead: the clinical impression, the main conditions of the differential, red flags and next steps.
Differential Explorer
Ever find yourself going back and forth between two diagnoses?
Put two to four conditions side by side.
Compare fit with the case, what is for and against each, the evidence still needed, red flags and next steps. Each comparison is kept as first written. Select any condition to write an analysis focused on it; the earlier report is kept.
Clinical Snapshot
Would you like the whole picture before you walk into the room?
The whole analysis on one screen.
Snapshot lays every section out as a compact overview with the patient factors that were and weren't documented, for a last check before you see the patient or write the note. It prints on its own.
Sources
Where does that recommendation come from, and is it current?
Citations you can check, and none invented.
For every case, Lithaya looks up guidelines from the last ten years and systematic reviews in PubMed for the clinical impression, matched to the patient's age group, and gives them to the AI as the only sources it may cite. The articles are real and linked; any reference the AI invents is removed and counted. The AI chooses which article supports each statement, so check that each citation fits.
- Each [n] opens the Sources list over the report, with the quoted passage
- “Check it yourself”: ready-made searches in PubMed, StatPearls, NICE, WHO, CDC, TRIP and Google Scholar for each condition
- Only condition names are searched, never your case text
Safeguards in every report
What if the AI gets it wrong?
Made to be reviewed, not just read.
Tools above every report
Changed the report and wish you could see what it said before?
Nothing is overwritten without a trace.
Where the case goes
Is it safe to put a case in here?
Identifiers removed first, then sent only to produce your report.
Before anything is sent, Lithaya removes common identifiers such as names, phone numbers, ID numbers, dates of birth and addresses, asks you about any word that may be a name, and shows you what it removed. The case then passes through Lithaya to our AI provider only to produce the report; neither keeps it, and it is not used to train AI models. Leave out names and other identifying details.
