01256 335 600
About Us
Dr Watson is a doctor-led medical evidence review service providing independent clinical scrutiny of medical evidence relied upon in personal injury claims.
Our role is to assess whether medical evidence used in litigation is clinically robust, proportionate, and consistent with accepted medical standards. We apply objective medical reasoning to existing evidence rather than generating new evidence or advocating for either party.
In practice, Dr Watson is most commonly instructed in Road Traffic Accident (RTA), Employers’ Liability (EL), and Public Liability (PL) claims, where medical evidence plays a central role in determining outcomes.
Where evidential clarity is not available through standard disclosure, Dr Watson also supports proportionate, clinically-led steps to resolve evidential deadlock.
What We Do
Medical evidence often becomes the primary driver of valuation and decision-making in personal injury claims. That evidence is frequently relied upon by professionals who are not clinicians.
Dr Watson provides independent clinical scrutiny of medical evidence used in personal injury claims, and supports proportionate steps to resolve evidential uncertainty where that evidence is delayed, incomplete, or not forthcoming.
Dr Watson’s doctors independently review medical reports and associated records to assess:
-
Whether the diagnosis is clinically supported
-
Whether causation has been properly reasoned
-
Whether prognosis aligns with recognised recovery norms
-
Whether symptoms are consistent with contemporaneous record
-
Whether functional impact and treatment recommendations are proportionate
Our reviews involve structured cross-comparison of expert opinion, contemporaneous medical records, mechanism of injury, and recognised recovery norms. Our focus is evidential reliability and clinical reasoning, not advocacy.
The purpose of Dr Watson’s service is to support evidential clarity in personal injury claims, enabling fair, proportionate and timely progression.
This is achieved by:
-
Clinically scrutinising disclosed medical evidence where it exists, and
-
Supporting proportionate, clinically-led steps to resolve evidential deadlock where evidence is delayed, incomplete, or not forthcoming.
In both scenarios, the objective is the same: to ensure that decisions are based on clinically robust, reliable medical information rather than uncertainty, assumption, or prolonged delay.
Purpose of the Service
Why Doctor-led Scrutiny Matters
Claims professionals and legal teams are expected to interrogate medical evidence, yet they are not medically trained.
Doctor-led review allows evidence to be assessed using accepted clinical standards, against typical recovery trajectories, and with reference to medical plausibility rather than narrative presentation.