Clinical records that hold up under audit.
Notes that cannot be edited, signing blocked without a professional license number, verifiable consent forms and every entry cryptographically chained. When an inspection, a CONAMED complaint or a lawsuit arrives, the proof is already there.
- NOM-004-SSA3 · NOM-024-SSA3
- SHA-256 chain verifiable without the vendor
- A dedicated database per institution
- Mexican technology
A record that can be altered proves nothing.
Most clinical systems store information well. The problem shows up later, when someone asks whether that information is the same one recorded that day.
The note that appeared later
A record where a note can be edited, even if a log remains, leaves the most uncomfortable question open: was this written on the day of the event, or on the day of the lawsuit?
The signature nobody can stand behind
Consent forms signed on paper that get filed, copied and lost, or signed on screen with no way to prove the text did not change after signing.
The unlicensed staff member who signed
NOM-004 requires the full name and professional license number of whoever writes the note. If the system does not block it, sooner or later someone signs without one.
Mexican health standards are not met with a manual. They are met with the engine.
We do not sell "help with compliance": the requirements are implemented as system behavior. Users cannot skip them even if they want to, and that is the difference in front of an inspector.
| Regulatory requirement | How Overseer delivers it | Status |
|---|---|---|
| NOM-004 §5.10 · Identity of the provider | Signing a note is blocked if the professional has no license number on file. The professional license and any specialty licenses are recorded, and they are printed next to their name on every document. | Implemented |
| NOM-004 §5.9 · Correcting notes | Notes are never edited or deleted. Corrections are made through an addendum linked to the original: both stay visible, each with its author and its moment. Just as on paper, where a mistake is not scratched out. | Implemented |
| NOM-004 §6 · Structured clinical history | Identification sheet, medical history, physical examination, ICD-10 coded diagnoses, multidisciplinary SOAP progress notes, laboratory and imaging results, transfer referrals, and admissions and discharges with their formal note. | Implemented |
| NOM-004 §10.1 · Informed consent | Templates versioned by medical procedure, signatures from the patient or their responsible party, the physician and witnesses, append-only revocation, and documentary verification that detects whether the text or a signature was altered after issue. | Implemented |
| NOM-024-SSA3 · Information integrity | A SHA-256 chain per institution: each entry incorporates the hash of the previous one. Automatic nightly verification, and reproducible by a third party without us. | Implemented |
| NOM-024 · Auditable confidentiality | Reads of sensitive documents are sealed too: it is on record who consulted which file and when. That is what makes it possible to prove improper access, or to rule it out. | Implemented |
| LFPDPPP · Personal data | A record holder access portal, audited reads, physical isolation per institution and files served only to authenticated users. | Right of access implemented |
| Controlled supplies · Operational support | Custody of the patient’s medication down to the dose, kept separate from billable stock, with losses requiring photographic evidence and closing records with a witness, an authorized manager and a notification reference. | Implemented |
We also tell you what we do not do: the signature is handwritten and digitized with a cryptographic seal, not the Mexican e.firma and not third party time stamping. A vendor who promises you PKI without having it is building you a problem for the day of the forensic examination.
Every entry is born sealed. There is no later step anyone can forget.
The forms that live on paper today (nursing sheets, rounds, temperature logs, cleaning and disinfection, shift handover, inspections) become digital forms with server-side validation and sequential numbering. On save, the entry and its seal are written in the same transaction: if anything fails, neither the data nor the seal remains.
- A double timestamp: the time declared by the device and the server’s time, both visible. Nobody backdates without it showing.
- Who answered for it, frozen: the entry stores the responsible position and who supervised whoever recorded it that day. It is treated like a tax receipt: it does not change even if the staff changes later.
- Versioned structures: if the form changes, historical entries keep the layout they were created with.
- Capture at the bedside or on the move: through a browser or a Telegram bot, with location, photographs and validated data.
Every entry incorporates the hash of the one before it.
Altering a piece of data from six months ago would mean recomputing every seal that came after it, in a database the application gives no edit path to. This is not a promise of good behavior: it is a mathematical property of how the data is stored.
- A genesis block anchored to your institution: it prevents transplanting a chain from one database to another.
- Automatic nightly verification and a panel showing the result with its date.
- Reproducible without us: the algorithm is public (SHA-256 over canonical JSON) and your expert witness can recompute the entire chain with standard tools, years later, without asking us for anything.
- Reads are sealed too: who consulted which file and when, with deduplication so the log does not get padded.
If a block failed to reproduce its hash, verification points to the first one that breaks: everything before it remains valid evidence and everything after comes under scrutiny. Our auditor’s manual includes that forensic procedure step by step, along with the declared limits of the seal.
Everyone reaches what is theirs. Only what is theirs.
The system resolves which record belongs to each person from their identity, never from whatever comes in the web address. Nobody sees someone else’s record by changing a number in the URL.
Patient or resident
A read-only portal with their record: consultations, notes, signed consent forms and documents, with a print option. If the institution enables it, they fill in the forms assigned to them themselves.
Physicians and clinical staff
Not a portal: the system itself. Each profile runs its own modules and only those. The physician prescribes and signs notes (with their license validated), nursing administers and records, and the head nurse is the only one with medication custody.
Staff, as record holders
The same person can be an employee of the institution and also a patient or a family member. The system models this with two separate axes: what they can do, and which records they are the subject of. They open "My Documents" and see what is theirs, without it mixing with their work.
Responsible party or guardian
They are recorded in the patient’s file with their relationship, identification and contact details, and they sign the consent forms as an external recipient. Their own consultation portal is on the roadmap.
Portal on the roadmap
Institutional clients and sponsors
An insurer, a company that sends its staff or a foundation that sponsors stays are modeled as a customer: a read-only portal with the service entries linked to them and their evidence.
Suppliers
The same documentary rigor for your supply chain: the supplier’s record, current documents and the service entries that belong to them.
What makes this part secure
- Resolution by identity: the portal derives the entity from the user’s link, never from a URL parameter.
- Every read is sealed: if someone consults a record that was not theirs to see, it is demonstrable with date, IP address and approximate location.
- A mandatory personal password: the one the administrator hands over must be changed on first sign-in, so nobody else knows the record holder’s password.
- One link, one record: being a patient’s relative does not grant access to their record unless it is declared explicitly.
The entire patient lifecycle, on a single platform.
Patients
Identification sheet, structured clinical history, flagged allergies and the documents in the file.
Consultations
Immutable medical notes with ICD-10 coding, signing conditioned on a license number, and corrections through addenda.
Progress notes
Multidisciplinary SOAP notes with a snapshot of the professional who wrote them, plus laboratory and imaging.
Consent forms
Templates versioned by procedure, signatures from patient, physician and witnesses, revocation and tamper verification.
Medications
Prescription, dosing schedule, recorded administration and dose-level custody of the patient’s medication.
Warehouse
The institution’s supplies with atomic stock levels: never negative, with sealed receipts and issues.
Stay
Admissions with their regulatory type, companion and belongings, and a discharge note signed by the recipient.
Patient contacts
Responsible party, emergency contact and family composition, feeding into the social work assessment.
Forms
Your operating forms, each entry with its own number, evidence and seal.
My work
What each person owes during their shift, with a deadline indicator and a form finder.
Auditing
Activity, changes with before and after differences, and a chain integrity panel.
Complete record
The patient’s entire history in a single printable document, assembled from the live record.
One engine, several realities in healthcare.
The record is the same. What changes is what gets captured and who signs it. Configuration per profile happens during implementation, with no custom development.
Hospital and clinic
Outpatient care, inpatient stays, consent per procedure and control of the patient’s supplies kept separate from billable stock.
Residential and care homes
Long stays: admissions and discharges, a family member as responsible party, daily medication, rounds and a complete record for the family or the authorities.
Medical office
A complete record with no infrastructure: ICD-10 coded notes, prescriptions, consent forms and evidentiary backing from day one.
Laboratory and imaging
Results linked to the record, process forms with their own numbering and change traceability for certification.
Occupational health
Pre-employment and periodic examinations linked to the worker’s employment record, with the same evidentiary rigor.
Foundations and sponsorships
Private assistance institutions that must account to their board and their donors with evidence, not with reports.
The ones medical and quality directors ask us.
Can a physician correct a note they recorded incorrectly?
They do not edit it: they write an addendum linked to the original note, which is what NOM-004 requires and what is done on paper. Both stay visible and sealed, and it is clear who wrote each one and when. That impossibility of editing is exactly what makes the record usable as evidence.
Is the system’s signature the Mexican e.firma or FIEL?
No, and we tell you before your lawyer asks. It is a digitized handwritten signature (drawn on screen) plus a chained SHA-256 seal over the content, the authenticated author and the moment. That proves integrity and context. It does not incorporate PKI or third party time stamping. A vendor who promises you PKI without having it is building you a problem for the day of the forensic examination.
Can the patient’s guardian or responsible party sign in to the system?
Today they are recorded in the file with their relationship, identification and contact details, and they sign the consent forms as an external recipient, with their signature sealed alongside the document. A consultation portal of their own is on our roadmap, and we show it to you with dates in the demo.
What happens if a physician has no license number on file?
The system does not let them sign the note. It is not a warning that can be dismissed: it is a block. The professional license and any specialty licenses are recorded in their staff file and printed next to their name on every document they sign.
How do we prove nobody saw a record they should not have?
Reads of sensitive documents are sealed just like writes. You list the accesses to that person’s record over a period, cross them against the treating staff, and any unjustified access is demonstrated with date, IP address and approximate location. It works the other way too: to rule out an unfounded accusation.
Does our data end up mixed with other institutions’ data?
No. Each institution has its own dedicated database, not a column distinguishing it inside a shared table. The isolation is physical, and the integrity chain belongs to each one, anchored to its own genesis block.
And if tomorrow you no longer want to work with us?
Your information is yours and we hand it over in open formats. The integrity chain is verifiable with the public algorithm and standard tools: it does not depend on our existing. That is a design decision, not a commercial courtesy.
How long does it take to get it running?
It depends on scope, but the methodology is written and published: six phases with deliverables and exit criteria, from the initial assessment through post go-live support. In the demo we show you the complete implementation manual, not a promise.
See it with a real record from your institution.
A working session, not a presentation: we bring the live system and walk through your process, with your forms and your roles. If something it does not do, we tell you right there.
Book a demonstration
Write to us with the type of institution and the process that hurts most today. We reply with a proposed time.
Would you rather see it first?
The full platform, with all its verticals, is on the main page. There you will also find the real screens of the system and the detail on architecture and security.