Software for the months between visits

Your EMR ends at the visit. Healthspan medicine doesn't.

Pathmarker is what runs between appointments — the app your members use, the record everything lands in, the handover to their coach, and AI that drafts but never decides. Built so members feel looked after all year, and renew because of it.

Member portal Screens for your team A view for coaches One record AI that cites its sources PHIPA & PIPEDA
Founding Clinic Program · 2026 — one seat filled, four remain.
Two minutes

See what it actually does.

A walk through the member app and the screens your clinical team uses.

A gap the software was never built for

Proactive care is won between visits.
Your software was built for the visit itself.

Longevity care runs on visits every few months — and those months are where people slip off their plan, wearables go unread, education stalls, and the patient quietly stops feeling looked after. The EMR you bought was designed to capture the appointment, not the year around it.

3 months
The usual gap between visits. Everything that tells you whether a member will renew — how they are keeping up, their wearable data, their symptoms — builds up outside your chart.
200+
Biomarkers per member per year. A typical EHR was built around twenty.
5+
Disconnected tools each member juggles between visits — EMR portal, lab portal, wearable app, intake form, email. None of them talk.

And those months change what members do. Patients tighten up right before an appointment and drift once it is behind them — it is well enough documented to have a name, white-coat adherence. One study put an electronic monitor in the pill bottle and watched it happen.

88%
Five days before the visit

Doses taken as prescribed, as the appointment approaches. The member is getting ready to be seen.

86%
Just after the visit

It holds for a while. The conversation is fresh and the plan still feels live.

67%
One month later

A third of doses missed — and nothing in the chart records it.

So it is not only that you lose sight of the months between visits. The labs and readings you review at the visit were taken during the best week of them.1

1Cramer JA, Scheyer RD, Mattson RH, "Compliance declines between clinic visits." Arch Intern Med. 1990;150(7):1509–10. Twenty patients on anticonvulsants, monitored electronically: 88% of doses taken in the five days before a clinic visit, 86% in the days after, 67% one month later. A small, single-condition study — we cite it because it measured the drift directly, not because it settles the size of it. Similar white-coat adherence patterns have since been reported in asthma, diabetes, HIV, and glaucoma care. This is third-party research, not a study of Pathmarker.
  • i.
    Wearable data lives in apps the member owns and the clinic never sees.Oura, Whoop, Garmin — three trends a clinician should be reviewing, none on the chart.
  • ii.
    Lab review consumes hours of clinician time per week.Manual chart synthesis, copy-pasted between PDF, EHR notes, and the patient email.
  • iii.
    Coaches, ops staff, and physicians all see the same chart — or fight over consent.Either you share too much patient information, or you tie your team's hands.
  • iv.
    PHIPA / PIPEDA / PIPA compliance debt grows with every tool you bolt on.Data Processing Agreements (DPAs), audit trails, and consent live in five places — or none. Your privacy review gets harder every quarter.
The economics of the gap

A clinic members feel tracked by
is a clinic members renew with.

$100K/yr

is what ten renewals are worth to a 200-member clinic at a $10K average annual fee. Hold on to ten members you'd otherwise have lost, and that's the money back in your practice — and you're not spending to replace them just to stand still. Illustrative math on a reference clinic; your practice, your numbers.

Two forces decide the economics of a proactive practice — whether members renew, and what it costs your team to keep them. The research speaks to both, and both come back to the same thing: continuity. Patients staying with the same care team over time, instead of being passed between people.

25–30%
Lower odds of hospitalization and death for patients who kept the same practitioner 15+ years, versus one year. Observational, 4.55M patients.1
18/22
Studies in a systematic review found higher continuity of care linked to significantly lower mortality.2
~2 hrs
Of EHR and desk work for every hour of direct patient time — plus one to two more after clinic. Time-and-motion study, 57 physicians.3
~10 hrs/mo
Of capacity handed back to each practitioner if Pathmarker saves even thirty minutes a day. Our estimate — 30 min × ~20 workdays.4

The science shows continuity changes outcomes. Our bet: make members feel it every week — not just at the next appointment — and they stay.

1Sandvik H et al., "Continuity in general practice as predictor of mortality, acute hospitalisation, and use of out-of-hours care." Br J Gen Pract. 2022;72(715):e84–e90. n=4,552,978; a 15+-year relationship with the same GP was associated with ~25–30% lower odds of acute hospital admission, out-of-hours use, and death versus a one-year relationship.
2Pereira Gray DJ et al., "Continuity of care with doctors—a matter of life and death?" BMJ Open. 2018;8:e021161. Of 22 studies, 18 (82%) showed significantly lower mortality with higher continuity of care.
3Sinsky CA et al., "Allocation of Physician Time in Ambulatory Practice." Ann Intern Med. 2016;165(11):753–760. ~2 hrs of EHR and desk work per hour of direct clinical face time, plus 1–2 hrs after hours (57 physicians, 430 observed hours).
4Illustrative estimate: 30 min saved per practitioner per day × ~20 workdays/month ≈ 10 hrs/month. Not a measured Pathmarker result.
The continuity findings are observational — an association, not proof that continuity causes the outcomes — and they measure health, not renewal. They are third-party research on continuity of care, not a study of Pathmarker.
Proactive tracking. Collaborative care.

Tracking alone doesn't change outcomes.
Oversight alone doesn't either.

Research on chronic-condition self-management is consistent on this point: self-monitoring works when it's paired with a goal the patient helped set, and feedback that's structured and ongoing — not sporadic. Most software gives you one half of that.

Self-tracking, unseen

Consumer trackers — Whoop, MyFitnessPal, Function Health — hand the member data with no practitioner in the loop. The number moves. Nothing about the plan does.

Oversight, invisible

Practice-management and EMR tools give the practitioner a chart with no real-time view into what the member is actually doing between visits. The plan is sound. The member can't see themselves in it.

Pathmarker is the layer where both run against the same evidence — collaborative because the practitioner sets the goal and the member sees their own progress toward it, proactive because what happens between visits feeds directly into what the practitioner does next.

Across 25 randomized trials, self-monitoring paired with structured support and feedback lowered systolic blood pressure by ~6 mmHg. Monitoring on its own showed no significant effect.

— Tucker KL et al., individual-patient-data meta-analysis, PLOS Medicine 2017

That ~6 mmHg result is specific to blood pressure. Pathmarker applies the same closed loop — the member tracks, the practice responds, the number moves — as its operating principle, not as a promise of the same effect for every metric.

— How we read the evidence
Three pillars

One platform for the patient, the clinical team, and the science behind both.

That bridge is what the three pillars below build.

i.

Continuity members feel.

A portal members actually open — labs trended, wearables synced, daily log alive, education tracks evolving with their program. The clinic that shows up between visits is the clinic they renew with.

ii.

A record the EMR can't keep.

One record holding labs, wearables, daily logs, symptoms and visits together. AI-drafted lab interpretations and SOAP notes hang off it. Critical values bypass the queue. Your clinicians stop synthesizing by hand.

iii.

AI and consent you can defend.

AI drafts. Clinicians decide. Consent is enforced by the database itself, not by the screens. Audit log on every PHI access. PIA-ready, Canadian-domiciled.

Between visits · the four things that earn the renewal

What continuity looks like between visits.

That claim rests on four things the member actually uses — not a tab buried in a chart. Each runs between visits and feeds the same record.

Care that shows up between visits is the care members renew on.

See the member app in detail →

From upload to interpretation in hours, not days

One lab PDF.
Four steps.
No copy-paste.

What used to take a clinician's evening now happens between visits, before the next one.

01.

Patient uploads

Drag-and-drop PDF from any major lab provider — LabCorp, Quest, LifeLabs, Dynacare. Stored in your clinic's own space. The audit trail starts here.

02.

Auto-parse + trend

Biomarker names, values, reference ranges extracted to your database. Trended automatically against the patient's prior panels. Optimal / watch / attention bands.

03.

AI drafts an interpretation

Chart context to Anthropic Claude on AWS Bedrock — minimized and secret-scrubbed, carried as PHI under our AWS business associate agreement. Structured JSON back: trend commentary, watch flags, suggested follow-ups. Critical values bypass the queue.

04.

Clinician signs off

You review, edit, publish. The patient sees the AI summary and your final interpretation. Nothing reaches the patient until you decide.

The same shape applies to wearable streams, member messages, and visit transcripts. The same pattern every time, and one place the clinical record lives.

What a stand-alone scribe can't see

Your AI scribe drafts a note.
Ours drafts it against the whole chart.

A stand-alone scribe transcribes one conversation. Pathmarker's AI drafts against the same record it uses everywhere else — labs, wearables, daily log, every prior visit note — so what lands on the sign-off queue already knows what changed since last time.

Drafts against the whole chart, not just today's call

The SOAP draft isn't written from a blank page — it's written with labs, medications, and prior notes already in view, so it can flag what a stand-alone scribe can't: a new prescription that contradicts an existing one, a symptom that maps to a lab trend from three months ago.

One summary, not a transcript pile

Ask for a member's chart summary and get the whole record pulled together in seconds — not a folder of separate visit transcripts your clinician has to read end to end to piece together.

It cites its sources, or it says nothing

Every AI answer — in the draft, in the summary, in response to a clinical question — is grounded in real medical literature and cites its source. If it can't find grounding, it says so.

The chart doesn't reset between visits. Neither does the AI reading it.

How the AI is controlled

AI that drafts. Clinicians who decide.

The hard rules are coded into the platform — not posted on the wall. The difference between AI you can defend in a clinical-board meeting and AI you have to apologize for.

The AI never tells a member what their results mean.

AI explains and educates. It does not classify, score, dose, or interpret results to the patient. Everywhere a member can see, it refuses to give clinical advice and points them to the clinician.

AI drafts; clinicians sign off.

Lab interpretations, SOAP notes, message replies — every AI output is a draft. Nothing publishes, nothing sends, until a clinician reviews and signs.

Consent is a hard boundary in code.

The consent form names the three access scopes — clinical team, coach, service ops — by role. The platform enforces them in the database itself, not in the screens.

PHI minimized at the prompt layer.

Prompts carry only the fields that feature needs, and secrets — tokens, emails, record IDs — are scrubbed before the call. That keeps it to a minimum, but it does not make it anonymous: clinical text reaches Anthropic Claude on AWS Bedrock as PHI, under our business associate agreement. No training on your data.

Critical thresholds as source-of-truth.

The threshold list lives in version-controlled code, PR-reviewed by your practice lead — not buried in EHR settings. Every bypass is audit-logged.

See how the AI is controlled →

Canadian-domiciled · PHIPA · PIPEDA · PIA-ready

A platform that walks into your
privacy review and walks out clean.

Built in Canada, for Canadian proactive care clinics. Patient data rests in Canada (Montréal), and no PHI is persisted outside it. One call leaves — stateless AI inference, which carries PHI under our AWS business associate agreement and returns nothing to disk outside Canada. We put that in front of your privacy officer rather than bury it. PIA-ready on day one.

Data residency posture · Canadian region
Application + APICloud Run · containerized Rails 8
Montréal
Patient databaseCloud SQL for PostgreSQL · CMEK encryption
Montréal
Lab PDFs & documentsCloud Storage · CMEK
Montréal
AI inference (lab review, scribe drafts)AWS Bedrock · Anthropic Claude · stateless · PHI in transit under BAA, nothing persisted
Canada at rest
inference routed
to US regions
Speech-to-text (visit transcripts)Today: none — your video vendor produces the transcript · Canada-hosted transcription coming in a future phase
Your transcript vendor
Canadian STT
roadmap
Video conferencingToday: BYO vendor — Zoom for Healthcare, Teams, Meet · Native Canada-hosted video coming in a future phase
Your video vendor
Native Canadian video
roadmap
Recordings and transcriptsPulled via OAuth webhook · Cloud Storage · CMEK
Montréal
Secrets, keys, audit logSecret Manager · Cloud Logging · Cloud Monitoring
Montréal
Privacy & compliance controls
  • PHIPA, PIPEDA & PIPA aligned.Consent, collection limitation, accuracy, safeguards, openness, individual access — mapped feature-by-feature.
  • PIA-ready onboarding.Data-flow maps, vendor list, consent-form templates, retention schedule — handed over before go-live.
  • Data Processing Agreement.Standard DPA + sub-processor list. Your space. Your data. Cleanly portable. No training on your patients.
  • Audit log on every PHI access.Who, what, when — for every read of a patient record, every AI inference, every consent change. Exportable on demand.
  • Consent in code.Three scopes — clinical team, coach, service ops — enforced at the data layer. The consent form and the access control are the same thing.
  • Right-to-export, right-to-erasure.Full export in standard formats on demand. Erasure workflow respects clinical-record retention obligations.
  • Breach response runbook.72-hour notification SLA to your privacy officer. Incident playbook reviewed annually.

See the isolation model in detail →

Why us

Built for the medicine the existing software can't run.

Bryan founded Pathmarker after twenty-five years in cybersecurity, including protecting the health authorities of BC, Canada — a long career spent on the architecture, network, and strategy side of protecting clinical data.

Bryan's wife — Dr. Mary Pines — has spent the past eight years building and running her own longevity practice, Better Beyond 40. Working alongside Mary's longevity practice, he watched her — and the broader Canadian longevity field — try to deliver proactive, continuous care using software built for something else. Tools designed for fifteen-minute acute appointments, retrofitted for the most relationship-intensive medicine in the industry. Member portals that felt like patient billing systems. Practitioner consoles stitched together from a lab vendor, a wearable dashboard, a separate scribe, a separate scheduler, and a Google Doc for the actual care plan.

The longevity members Mary serves expect a different kind of relationship with their care — high-touch, continuous, evidence-grounded — and they pay for it. The software they were being asked to use didn't match what they were being asked to invest in. Bryan built Pathmarker to close that gap.

His healthcare background shaped Pathmarker's compliance-first architecture: Canadian data residency by design, consent boundaries enforced at the code level, and the discipline to build healthcare software the way healthcare data demands.

One record

The member's data stops living in a dozen places.

A longevity member's data ends up scattered across a lab portal, a wearable app, intake forms, a spreadsheet, and a half-dozen other places — none of them talking, each its own login and its own audit trail, and every join a place where context drops. Pathmarker pulls the data and program tracking into one record. Your EMR, scheduling and billing keep doing what they do — Pathmarker unifies the data and the program around them.

From data scattered across many places to one record Left side shows ten places a member's data lives today — lab results, wearables, intake, daily logs, symptoms, nutrition, education, medications, visit notes, and care plan — scattered and disconnected. An arrow points right to the Pathmarker record, where the same ten data sources feed one central record. — TODAY · DATA IN A DOZEN PLACES The record is scattered Lab results Vendor portals Wearables Oura, Whoop Intake JotForm, paper Daily logs Spreadsheet, app Symptoms Notes, email Nutrition Meal-plan app Education Teachable Medications Fullscript, list Visit notes Docs, scribe Care plan Notion, sheets Unifies into — WITH PATHMARKER One record Pathmarker one record Postgres + RLS Labs Wearables Intake Daily logs Symptoms Nutrition Education Medications Visit notes Care plan
Lab results
from vendor portals
Wearables
Oura, Whoop, Garmin
Intake & questionnaires
JotForm, paper
Daily logs & habits
spreadsheets, apps
Symptoms & notes
notes, email
Nutrition
standalone meal apps
Education progress
Teachable, Thinkific
Medications & supplements
Fullscript, lists
Visit notes & transcripts
Google Docs, scribe
Care plan & outcomes
Notion, spreadsheets
Becomes one record — Pathmarker. One agreement, one audit trail, one place the member's data.
One record, not a dozen logins
Founding Clinic Program · 2026

We are taking on five founding clinics this year.
One is filled. Four remain.

01
02
open
03
open
04
open
05
open
Lifetime price lock.Founding pricing forever, even when the list price doubles. Renewals never reprice.
Direct line to product.Quarterly advisory seat. Direct founder Slack. Your feature requests jump the roadmap queue.
Co-marketing rights.Joint case study, conference co-presentation, your clinic featured in our launch materials. We grow together or not at all.
White-glove implementation.A dedicated engineer for the first 90 days. Your environment, your domain, your data — provisioned, migrated, and verified.
Data export guarantee.Full export, on demand, in standard formats. No lock-in clause, no exit penalty, nothing held over you.
90-day pilot, no-fault exit.If we haven't earned the renewal in three months, the contract terminates and your data goes with you. No recovery fee.
From signed agreement to your first members

Ninety days. Four checkpoints.
You decide whether to renew.

Day 0

Discovery + provisioning

Workflow audit with your lead clinician. Your own Pathmarker environment set up on your domain. DPA, consent, PIA template, and audit-log scaffolding signed off.

Day 30

Core staff onboarded

Clinicians, coaches, practice lead, and ops staff onboarded by role. Lab parsing live. Wearable connections established. Your first members invited.

Day 60

AI in routine use

AI lab review running on every new panel. Your clinicians are working the queue and updating care plans without thinking about it. Calendar sync stable. Telehealth + scribe in routine use.

Day 90

Pilot review

Clinician hours reclaimed, patient NPS, AI-draft accept rate, support load — all measured. You decide whether to convert. We earn the renewal or step away.

Your clinic gets its own separate environment — your data, your domain, your compliance position. Nothing shared with another clinic.

A 30-minute conversation, not a contract

A workflow review
with your lead clinician,
next week.

We will sit with one of your physicians for thirty minutes, walk through a real patient panel, and show you exactly where Pathmarker would buy back time. Then we'll send you the recording. No deck. No live customers yet — we'll tell you exactly where we are.
Book the workflow review
Four founding seats remain