DENTEDIT Payment integrity
Book a demo

Pre-adjudication payment integrity for dental plans

Every dollar you hold back, defensible to the line.

DentEdit edits dental claims before they adjudicate — twelve layers of clinical, coding and policy logic, priced in integer cents, every recommendation reproducible from its own execution trace.

No model is anywhere near a number. No recommendation without the trace that produced it. No figure published that does not reconcile against its own parts.

True of every claim

>1K/sec
Claims evaluated, reference hardware
12 layers
Applied before a dollar moves
100%
Decisions reproducible from their own record

The throughput figure is a reference measurement on our own hardware, not a promise about yours — we re-run the benchmark in your environment during evaluation.

Twelve edit layers

Document, technical, coding, duplicate, bundling, clinical, diagnosis, eligibility, program, documentation, predetermination, ortho.

Deterministic money

Integer cents, frozen clock, fixed line order. Same inputs, identical amounts and identical calculation trace.

Audited by construction

Every PHI read recorded before the response leaves. Eight self-serve compliance answers, no engineering ticket.

Your environment or ours

Multi-tenant SaaS today; customer-hosted in your own VPC is design-partner work, on the same engine and the same controls.

The cost of deciding late

Recovery is the expensive way to be right.

Dental is the line of business where the errors are structural rather than exotic: a crown replaced inside its interval, a component billed beside the comprehensive procedure that contains it, a service on a tooth that was extracted two years ago, an estimate that quietly became history. Every one of them is knowable before the money moves.

Post-pay clawback burns the relationship

Recovering a paid dental claim costs you the abrasion with the practice, the appeal, and the staff hours — to land where a pre-payment edit would have landed for free.

A denial you cannot explain gets overturned

If the reason is a rule number and a canned sentence, the appeal wins. DentEdit hands the reviewer the numbered trace: which layer fired, which conditions passed, which facts they were read from, and what was skipped and why.

AI you cannot audit cannot touch money

Assistive models belong alongside the engine, de-identifying by default and never authoritative. In DentEdit that is a boundary enforced by the software with an audit record on both sides of it — not a policy in a slide.

What the platform does

Edit, price, and prove — in that order.

One deterministic pass over the claim, before adjudication. What comes out is a recommendation, an amount, and the evidence for both.

01

Edit before you pay

Twelve layers execute in a fixed order over one consistent view of the claim — tooth-aware, patient-level, and aware that a dependent never inherits a subscriber’s treatment history. Your own policy rules run in the same pass as the standard edits, governed the same way.

  • ·Frequency, interval and replacement limits
  • ·Bundling and mutually exclusive same-day services
  • ·Predetermination and orthodontic lifecycles
02

Price deterministically

Contracted amount, allowed amount, deductible, coinsurance, payer and member liability, per-line adjustment reasons and a numbered calculation trace. Integer cents throughout. Two invariants hold on every priced claim, and every total is the exact sum of its parts.

submitted = allowed
  + writtenOff + balanceBill
allowed = payer + member
  − balanceBill + otherPayerPaid
03

Prove it afterwards

A claim is never edited in place and a re-evaluation adds to the record rather than replacing it — nothing is erased. Every rule version is permanent and passes a two-person approval with worked examples on both sides. Appeals and overturns feed back into each rule’s measured accuracy.

  • ·Per-claim evidence package
  • ·Shadow mode before a rule ever affects a dollar
  • ·Rule governance report with precision measured, not claimed

What we commit to

Eight commitments that hold on every claim.

Each one is a property of the system rather than a promise about how it is operated. Your diligence review gets these answers in writing on day one, and gets to test them on the call.

Read the security posture
01

The same claim, the same policy and the same date always produce the same recommendation — reproducible years later by anyone holding the record.

02

No AI model participates in a decision or an amount. Every dollar is arithmetic your own analyst can reproduce from the claim and its trace.

03

Your data is separated from every other plan’s by construction rather than by configuration — including the analytics layer, where cross-plan access is not something the platform can express.

04

Analytics never influence an adjudication decision. What the engine reads to decide a claim and what your analysts explore are deliberately separate.

05

Nothing found, source unavailable and never asked are three different answers. A report never reads as clean because a system was down.

06

Every published total reconciles against its own detail, and unmeasured is never reported as zero. A figure that does not balance is withheld rather than shown.

07

Every read and export of member information is recorded as it happens — what was accessed, by whom, in what role — without copying that information into the log.

08

Every intake channel balances: what you sent equals what was decided plus what was itemised as rejected. A claim never enters twice and never disappears quietly.

The execution order

Twelve layers, one pass, fixed order.

Order is part of the contract. The same claim, the same rule content and the same clock produce the same decision — with the rule set identified by a content hash, so a decision can be reproduced years later.

L01
Document verification

A paper claim nobody has verified is held, not priced.

L02
Technical

Structure, dating, identifiers, ranges — checked at intake and again in the engine.

L03
Coding

CDT validity, tooth and surface coherence, quantity sanity.

L04
Duplicate & history

Only finalized accepted claims count as history. Estimates never do.

L05
Bundling

Component-in-comprehensive, same claim or same day across claims.

L06
Clinical history

Tooth-level longitudinal record at patient level, not subscriber level.

L07
Diagnosis validation

Where a state requires one, read from the transmitted claim — never inferred.

L08
Eligibility & provider

Explicit directories only, including coordination of benefits. Coverage is never fabricated.

L09
Program policy

State Medicaid and CHIP packs, chosen by enrollment rather than by a submitted value.

L10
Documentation

Attachment gaps ask for information. They never produce a denial.

L11
Predetermination

An estimate is a question, never money — and never treatment history.

L12
Orthodontic lifecycle

Case-level aggregate, banding and continuation, lifetime maximum tracked separately.

FAILS CLOSED

A missing fact is never a benign zero.

If a fact a calculation depends on is absent, stale or out of range, no amount is offered at all. A zero-dollar recommendation is never a substitute for "cannot be priced" — and each refusal names its reason.

Eligibility not confirmed Fee schedule not in effect Accumulators from another plan year Primary payer’s payment unknown Document not yet verified Patient date of birth required
NEVER ADVERSE ON PAPERWORK

A payer-side gap is not a clinical judgement.

A missing, unreadable or stale document says nothing about whether the dentist did the work. Every attachment edit asks for information or pends — denying there would convert your own paperwork gap into a refusal to pay for treatment that happened, and that is the finding that comes back as an overturn.

Assistive AI

Beside the engine. Never within it.

Five assistive capabilities — drafting a rule from a policy document, rule intelligence, explanation, narrative understanding, override-pattern analysis. All five run behind one audited boundary, closed and de-identifying by default.

Colour is never the only signal. Every model-produced surface in the product is also marked in words, so a greyscale governance printout and a screen reader tell the two apart as reliably as the screen does.

Deterministic

Reproducible by anyone holding the same inputs — and the only thing the governance machinery may act on.

  • The engine and every edit
  • The execution trace
  • All pricing and every dollar figure
  • Structural findings on remittance
Model assertion

Advisory, unverified until the platform says otherwise, and never authority.

  • A drafted rule, which lands in DRAFT
  • A plain-language explanation, re-verified against the trace
  • A narrative summary for the reviewer
  • An observed override pattern
A drafted rule is a draft

It enters the same gate as a human-authored one: four eyes, passing test cases, and the operator who asked a model to write it is excluded from approving it.

A model never chooses a number

A dollar amount in a drafted rule is checked against the source document before it can reach the rule. No LLM is anywhere near an adjudicated figure.

Nothing leaves unlogged

One audited gateway records what went out and what was removed — including identifiers hidden inside sentences the platform itself wrote.

Deployment

Run it as a service, or run it yourself.

A deployment that says nothing about its posture is closed. Anonymous access defaults to closed in production and is logged at boot, so the profile a process is running is a fact you can read rather than infer.

Multi-tenant SaaS

Your environment, your keys, your reference data. Isolation is demonstrated rather than described: another plan’s claims, decisions, work queues, authored policy and reporting are all unreachable, and benefits data is held apart so one plan’s fee schedule can never price another plan’s claim.

·Identity, role and plan come from your directory — never from the claim
·Analytics and relationship data separated per plan, not filtered per plan
·A claim enters once. A retry or a resend can never pay twice

Customer-hosted, in your VPC — planned

The same engine and the same controls, inside your own boundary. Member data stays where your policy says it stays; licensed content packs arrive through the Content Update Manager, and a deployment that cannot verify content says so instead of trusting it.

·Administration and claims data held in separate custody
·Runs with no AI provider connected at all
·Intake by 837D, MFT/SFTP, object drop, database staging or bulk REST
Stateless
Per claim, so capacity scales out
One pass
Twelve layers, no second run
Off the path
No AI call in claim processing
Your numbers
Benchmarked on your infrastructure

We do not publish a claims-per-second figure as a promise: it belongs to the hardware it was measured on. Our own reference measurements, the machine behind them and the limits we have not yet demonstrated are on the platform page — and the benchmark that decides anything is the one we run in your environment.

Compliance & audit

Your auditor should not need an engineer.

Eight questions a compliance review actually asks are answered self-serve in the product, from an append-only access and export trail that names the record, the person, their role, where the request came from and its outcome — and never the member information itself.

If that record cannot be written, an export is refused and a clinical read is not blocked. Coverage and gaps are published, because a report that answers "who read this patient's record" with an empty list is worse than no report at all.

Answered without engineering assistance
Who read this patient's record, and when?
What left the platform, in what export, to whom?
Which rule decided this claim, at which version?
Who approved that rule, and who was excluded from approving it?
What was deployed, when, and what was rolled back?
Which overrides were taken, by which role, for what reason?
What did a model see, and what was removed before it did?
Where are this claim's facts, end to end, in one package?

Book a demo

Bring us a claim you disagreed about.

We will run it, show you the trace step by step, and show you the money it produces — or the named reason it refuses to produce any. Forty-five minutes, your people, our engineers.

01

Your claims, your policy. A working session on the edits you already argue about internally.

02

The governance walk. Author a rule, fail its own gate, then pass it — in front of you.

03

The security read. Isolation, the access trail and the AI boundary, demonstrated on a live process.

Longer form, more detail

Send no PHI. A demo runs on synthetic claims unless a signed agreement says otherwise.