Solutions

A governed clinical browser doctors can actually trust

Mira's proven flagship: source-aware clinical AI inside approved medical sites, hard PHI controls, and confidence-scored answers in a stable format — so clinicians move faster without opening the door to unmanaged chatbots.

Book a demoTalk to sales
Approved
Answers only on allowlisted medical sources by default
0
PHI sent to providers without policy + redaction
5+
Specialist reviewers behind every clinical answer
1 format
Source basis · assessment · safety · gaps · confidence
The problem

Why clinical AI stalls at the hospital door

Clinicians juggle tabs, copy-paste between portals, and can't safely use general AI on patient context. Hospitals can't approve ungoverned tools.

Tab chaos

Evidence, drug references, EHR portals and guidelines live in a dozen tabs. Switching costs time at the point of care.

Unsafe general AI

Consumer chatbots will answer anything, with no source control, no PHI guardrails and no audit — a non-starter for compliance.

No governance story

Hospitals can't approve AI they can't scope, redact, route and audit. So clinicians use nothing — or use it unsafely.

How Mira helps

Source-aware clinical chat — inside the page, under policy

Ask questions about the clinical page you're reading. Mira scopes AI to policy-approved visible content, redacts PHI before any provider call, and routes the question through specialist reviewers before answering.

  • Active-page clinical chat — Summarize the open page, selected passages, tables and section headings — without scraping hidden content or form values.
  • DoctorAgent orchestration — Evidence, pharmacology, differential-diagnosis, patient-safety and source-quality reviewers structure the answer before you see it.
  • Confidence scoring — Every answer carries a calibrated confidence so clinicians know how much to trust it — and a final reviewer keeps the format stable.
  • Clinical scope gate — Off-topic or non-medical prompts are blocked, preventing general-purpose AI drift inside a clinical deployment.
drug database · approved source
Interactions for warfarin + new NSAID order on this page?
Major interaction flagged · bleeding risk. Basis: 2 sections on page. Confidence: High. Missing: renal function.
Approved-source · PHI redacted
Capabilities

Clinical capabilities, governed

Approved medical workspaces

Fast access to leading clinical reference sites, drug databases, public-health authorities, clinician networks, your EHR portal and your own approved sources.

Specialist reviewers

Pharmacology, differential diagnosis, patient safety and evidence reviewers plus diagnostic and source-quality critics.

PHI / PII / ePHI detection

Warns or blocks when patient-identifying data appears in selected or visible context, enforcing no-send policy before model calls.

Stable answer format

Source basis, clinical assessment, safety and contraindications, missing data and confidence — easy to train, audit and compare.

Visible-context inspector

Clinicians and admins can see exactly what context the model is allowed to receive before sensitive use.

Department packages

Primary care, emergency, pharmacy & medication safety, residency education, and clinical quality / evidence review.

Use cases

From the floor to the formulary

Repeatable, reviewable AI support across clinical workflows — always source-aware and audit-ready.

  • Medication safety checks — Contraindications, interactions, renal/hepatic considerations and adverse effects on approved pharmacology sources.
  • Differential diagnosis support — Red flags, workup, risk stratification and dangerous alternatives — challenging premature closure.
  • Evidence review — Separate opened-page facts from inference, and challenge weak, stale or unsupported sources.
  • Residency & education — Structured, citable answers that reinforce good clinical reasoning for trainees.
clinical evidence source
Summarize the workup for suspected PE in this guideline.
Structured: red flags, risk score, imaging path. Inference separated from page facts. Confidence: Moderate.
Evidence reviewer · cited
Approved workspaces & integrations

Trusted apps for this role

Clinical reference sitesPatient-education librariesDrug databasesMajor medical centersPublic-health authoritiesClinical guideline sourcesClinician networksYour EHR portalYour approved sources
Compliance & controls

Mapped to your obligations

HIPAA presetsPHI / ePHI no-send gateMetadata-first auditRBAC by specialtyABAC by role/teamBAA-ready routingOn-device redaction
FAQ

Questions for Healthcare teams

Does the AI see patient data (PHI)?+
Only what policy allows, and only after on-device redaction. PHI/ePHI detection warns or blocks before any provider call, a no-send gate can prevent provider execution entirely, and the visible-context inspector shows exactly what the model receives.
Can it answer outside approved medical sources?+
By default, no. Mira answers on allowlisted medical sites and physician-grade terminology. A clinical scope gate blocks off-topic prompts, and a recoverable intent confirmation lets a clinician confirm terse intent on an approved site.
How do we roll it out without disruption?+
Start with a department package (e.g. pharmacy & medication safety), a fixed source allowlist and a physician champion. Pass security review early with our HIPAA evidence pack, run a fixed-scope pilot, then expand department by department.

Bring governed clinical AI to your team

See Mira answer real clinical questions on approved sources — with PHI controls and confidence scoring — in a 30-minute demo.

Book a demo