Use the pathway in a live review
Load a fictional TB program, record the questions that need local confirmation, and export handoffs, actions and agreed measures. No AI connection is needed for this workspace.
Open the pilot workspaceWhat the evidence establishes
A positive screen leads to diagnostic evaluation, according to WHO screening guidance. WHO's recording guidance connects screening, diagnostic, laboratory and treatment records.
The 2026 Genki access-package FAQ documents online/offline use and Augmento registration, result review and screening statistics. Those published capabilities should be checked in the selected deployment. They do not prove either complete or incomplete follow-through.
WHO's 2025 CAD policy concerns screening in people aged 15 and older. Clinical eligibility, diagnostic pathways and threshold decisions belong to the qualified clinical/program team.
A candidate process to validate
The following is a review model. It is not a map of any specific client's current process or a finding of failure.
| Stage | Question for the local owner | Completion evidence to agree |
|---|---|---|
| Registration and episode linkage | How are the screening episode, result and subsequent service linked across the existing tools? | An episode identifier that can be reconciled across the agreed stages. |
| Clinical/program-directed next step | Who owns the handoff after review, and how does the receiving service accept or decline it? | Named accountable role, accepted handoff or documented alternative disposition. |
| Specimen or referral logistics | Where applicable, how are collection, dispatch, receipt and exceptions recorded? | Acknowledged receipt, or an exception with an owner and next action. |
| Result availability and acknowledgement | How does the responsible team know a result is available and correctly linked? | Linked result and acknowledgement through the approved workflow. |
| Program linkage or other disposition | What proves that the agreed next service happened or that another disposition is valid? | Verified disposition; keep unknown, pending, transferred and declined statuses distinct. |
| Reconciliation and oversight | If offline work or multiple registers exist, who resolves mismatches and overdue episodes? | A reconciled exception list and a documented review owner. |
Chennai mobile screening
A 2025 deployment study reports 25,598 people screened in 2022 through four mobile units, with registration, imaging, Genki assessment and subsequent sample collection.
This is screening activity. It is not a measured completion rate or evidence of Clinopilot impact. The authors include DeepTek employees; the model-performance reference used radiologist annotations.
Read the bounded case recordNational program context
India's 2025 program guidance covers referral and specimen transport, routine data-quality review and Ni-kshay reporting. Confirm whether those requirements apply to the selected deployment.
This does not establish a vendor's Ni-kshay interface or apply automatically outside India. The WHO/TDR toolkit supports local implementation evaluation; clinical decisions remain with program owners.
Questions before an assessment
- Which deployment, population and operational decision are in scope?
- What does the current product configuration already support?
- Who owns each handoff across screening teams, laboratories and the program?
- Which unresolved situations create the most effort or delay, according to local staff?
- Can the program provide an approved process walkthrough, field definitions and aggregate stage counts?
- Which person can approve changes, and what decision should the completed review enable?
Measure the agreed process
Agree one eligible cohort and a time window. Candidate measures include accepted handoffs, documented dispositions, time between operational stages, unresolved exceptions and staff effort. These are proposed local definitions, not published performance benchmarks or guaranteed benefits.
Separate missing records from a service that did not happen. Record exclusions, changing case mix and capacity constraints. Demonstrate any effect using the client's validated baseline and follow-up data.
Browse the seven review models Read the evidence methods