Brighterway

What do they actually do

Brighterway provides a cloud service that ingests unstructured medical records (PDFs/scans) from existing intake methods (portals, SFTP, claim systems) and returns structured, review‑ready outputs tailored to specific roles in the workers’ compensation and medical‑legal workflow (e.g., adjuster summaries, nurse triage views, IME/QME packets) pricing. The goal is to remove manual sorting and packet assembly so physicians and claims teams can review faster.

The workflow is: ingest records as‑is; deduplicate and classify pages; extract encounters, diagnoses, timelines; then generate role‑based formatted outputs. Customers can customize templates, sorting rules and quality checks, and use analytics on usage, turnaround times and quality to tune operations. A human‑in‑the‑loop option lets experts review or validate outputs, and the team emphasizes MD/AI researcher tuning and white‑glove onboarding for enterprise rollouts pricing.

They sell via pilot → enterprise tiers and position for high‑volume deployments. The company advertises handling “hundreds of millions of pages per year” and a job post claims “10M+ pages of medical records per month”; the site also claims “up to 50% improvement in productivity” and “save up to 70% on medical record processing” (company‑stated metrics) pricing job posting.

Who are their target customer(s)

• IME/QME physicians performing independent medical exams: They receive large piles of scanned PDFs and must manually sort pages and build timelines/diagnoses before exams, consuming physician time and delaying reports pricing YC profile.
• Medical‑legal exam providers (packet preparation firms): Staff spend significant time deduplicating and formatting records into consistent packets, making it hard to scale while maintaining quality control pricing.
• Third‑party administrators (TPAs) managing workers’ comp claims: They receive messy records across portals/systems and need clean, standardized summaries to route cases, decide next steps, and control processing costs pricing YC profile.
• Claims adjusters and insurer claims teams: Adjusters comb through unstructured records for key facts and timelines, slowing decisions and increasing reliance on external reviewers pricing.
• Nurse triage and in‑house clinical review staff: Clinicians spend time locating relevant encounters and prioritizing cases from chaotic records, causing backlogs and inconsistent triage decisions pricing.

How would they acquire their first 10, 50, and 100 customers

• First 10: Targeted founder/YC‑led outreach to IME/QME physicians and 1–2 medical‑legal exam firms with short, free or discounted pilots, white‑glove onboarding, and human validation; capture before/after time and cost metrics plus testimonials and one‑page case studies.
• First 50: Hire an experienced salesperson to run outbound to TPAs, IME networks, and claims ops using pilot case studies and a simple ROI calculator; standardize onboarding (templates, checklist, dedicated implementation) to shorten setup and speed closes.
• First 100: Pursue channel partnerships with national TPAs, IME networks, and record/claims software vendors, offering revenue share or bundles; pre‑package security/compliance and clear volume pricing, add light self‑serve onboarding and small AM team to drive rollouts and references.

What is the rough total addressable market

Top-down context:

In the U.S., workers’ comp premiums are roughly $42–43B and medical benefits total about $29B (2022), with millions of injury/illness cases annually driving record volume NCCI III/NASI BLS. The relevant spend for Brighterway is the record‑centric workflow (intake, dedupe, packet prep, summaries) inside that ecosystem.

Bottom-up calculation:

Using medical benefits ($29B) as the anchor, assume record processing and packet prep represents 1–5% of that spend: about $290M (1%), $870M (3%), to $1.45B (5%) U.S. TAM. Adding a portion of the IME/medical‑legal services market (global IME estimated in the low billions; U.S. is the largest region) could add several hundred million more 360iResearch.

Assumptions:

• Share of medical benefits attributable to record intake/organization and packet preparation is 1–5%, as a proxy for replaceable admin work.
• Scope focuses on U.S. workers’ comp/med‑legal workflows; excludes broader claims admin outside record processing.
• Adjacency adds are conservative slices of IME services spend where packet prep/review is a material component.

Who are some of their notable competitors

• Ciox: Large incumbent for medical‑record retrieval and abstraction, delivering cleaned, structured outputs (e.g., XML/JSON/FHIR) and analytics to payers and enterprises; strong fit for buyers wanting end‑to‑end retrieval plus structured data at scale site.
• Wisedocs: AI‑first medical‑record summarization for claims, legal, and IME users, pairing automated chronologies/summaries with human review—targets the same use case of turning PDFs into case‑ready summaries site.
• SuperInsight: Tool focused on building medical chronologies and concise summaries for legal and workers’‑comp workflows; competes where litigation‑grade chronology and packet prep are the primary needs site.
• EvolutionIQ (Medhub): Claims‑focused AI extracting medical insights and timelines for workers’‑comp adjusters, addressing payer/TPA use cases of surfacing key clinical changes and reducing review time site.
• ExamWorks: Established IME/medical‑legal service provider that offers record retrieval, document management, and packet preparation as part of full IME/peer‑review services—an alternative to buying standalone SaaS site.