Skip to content
CasePrompts
Build

By practice

Record workflows for workers' compensation — claimant

Compensability, the authorized-treatment trail, work restrictions, MMI and impairment language, and AWW evidence. Every prompt below assembles with this practice's emphasis already composed in — pick a workflow and add only the assignment details needed, using neutral labels where possible.

Lens version
1
Status
Published
Review scope
Internal workflow framing; no independent legal review recorded

Report a correction

Open the builder as workers' compensation — claimant →Review practice workflowsAll practices

Practice workflow set

Start with a workflow

Build a chronologyMedical records
Treatment trail with work-status languageAuthorizations, restrictions, MMI, and impairment ratings, verbatim and dated.Open in the builder →
Extract key testimonyDeposition transcript
Pull notice and course-of-employment admissionsWhat the employer's witnesses conceded about the accident and reporting.Open in the builder →
Find contradictionsMixed / full case record
Track the carrier's shifting denial reasonsDivergences across the adjuster file, dual-cited.Open in the builder →
Interrogate the fileMixed / full case record
Cited Q&A across the comp fileBenefits-relevant gaps flagged in every answer.Open in the builder →

A workers' compensation — claimant prompt, end to end

The configured workers' compensation — claimant lens adds this practice context to the template: This work product supports the injured worker's claim: establishing compensability, the authorized-treatment trail, work restrictions, and the wage evidence the benefits turn on.

CasePrompts composes that emphasis into every prompt for this practice. Here is one complete, copy-ready example: the “Treatment trail with work-status language” workflow using medical records as the source type, with the workers' compensation — claimant emphasis already built in. It pastes into any AI tool as is.

Preview and copy the complete example
Treatment trail with work-status language · Medical records

Synthetic example: Names, dates, organizations, and matter details are fictional placeholders, not a real case record.

Customize in builder
CONTEXT:
You are a litigation support analyst assisting claimant's workers' compensation counsel in a workers' compensation claim matter. The attached production is the medical records of Alex Morgan. The incident at issue occurred on January 15, 2025. The injuries and conditions that matter are: course and scope; notice; work restrictions; benefits. This work product supports the injured worker's claim: establishing compensability, the authorized-treatment trail, work restrictions, and the wage evidence the benefits turn on.

INSTRUCTIONS:
Build a complete treatment chronology covering every encounter in the production — visits, imaging, procedures, therapy sessions, and telephone encounters. For each encounter capture: provider and facility; date of service; presenting complaints in the patient's words where recorded; objective findings; diagnoses exactly as stated in the record (do not supply diagnoses or codes the record does not state); treatment rendered; medications; work or activity restrictions; and the next-step plan. Separately and explicitly:
1. Flag every gap in treatment longer than 30 days.
2. Flag every reference to symptoms, injuries, or treatment pre-dating January 15, 2025.
3. Collect every causation statement — any provider language attributing or declining to attribute a condition to the incident — verbatim.

In this engagement, additionally: Track the authorized-treatment trail precisely — referrals, authorizations, denials, and delays — and capture work-status notes, restrictions, MMI findings, and impairment ratings verbatim with dates.

TEMPLATE — format your output exactly as follows:
## Chronology
| Date | Provider / facility | Complaints | Findings | Diagnoses (as stated) | Treatment / meds | Restrictions | Cite |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
## Treatment gaps (> 30 days)
| Gap | Last visit before (cite) | First visit after (cite) |
|---|---|---|
## Pre-existing / prior history references
| Date | Provider | Verbatim reference | Cite |
|---|---|---|---|
## Causation statements (verbatim)
| Date | Provider | Exact language | Cite |
|---|---|---|---|

EVIDENCE REQUIREMENTS:
For every entry, cite provider, date of service, and the page or Bates number of the source record. Record diagnoses and causation language exactly as written — never normalize, upgrade, or infer a diagnosis, and never supply an ICD code the record does not contain. If a record page is illegible or an encounter is referenced but missing from the production, list it under a final heading "Missing or illegible — request from provider" rather than guessing at its contents.

If the provided record does not support a requested finding, write "not found in the record." Do not infer or fill gaps from outside knowledge.
The scope is limited to the requested task, stated issues, and provided record. Do not introduce outside subjects or sources.
A human reviewer must verify every material statement and citation against the source record before relying on or sharing the output.

Every template in the library assembles like this for workers' compensation — claimant — open the builder and add only the assignment details needed, using neutral labels where possible, or read the Attorney's Guide to AI Prompting for the method behind it.

How workers' compensation — claimant practitioners should brief an AI

How does the CasePrompts workers' compensation — claimant lens approach extract key testimony?
Prioritize testimony establishing the accident arose out of and in the course of employment, prompt reporting, and employer knowledge — plus every statement about restrictions and ability to work.
How does the CasePrompts workers' compensation — claimant lens approach build a chronology?
Track the authorized-treatment trail precisely — referrals, authorizations, denials, and delays — and capture work-status notes, restrictions, MMI findings, and impairment ratings verbatim with dates.
How does the CasePrompts workers' compensation — claimant lens approach find contradictions?
Focus on divergence between the employer/carrier's account of notice and authorization and what the records show, and on shifting reasons for denial across the file.
How does the CasePrompts workers' compensation — claimant lens approach summarize the record?
Organize around what the benefits turn on: compensability evidence, current work status and restrictions, treatment authorized versus requested, and average weekly wage support.
How does the CasePrompts workers' compensation — claimant lens approach draft from the record?
Write toward the statutory touchpoints — notice, causal connection, restrictions, wage loss — with provider and employer language quoted verbatim.
How does the CasePrompts workers' compensation — claimant lens approach interrogate the file?
Whenever an answer touches benefits, state whether the record documents the supporting wage, status, or authorization evidence and where; missing documentation is follow-up work, so flag it.

Template guides for workers' compensation — claimant

Read the clean, general guide for each curated workflow below. To apply the Workers' compensation — claimant context to your own facts, use the builder actions above.

Browse the full prompt library →