What the work looks like

You'll work through inpatient cases — admission notes, progress notes, discharge summaries, and the surrounding chart — and make a call on whether the documentation supports the care delivered and whether the care itself met standard. The judgment is only half the deliverable. The other half is the written rationale: why this admission met inpatient criteria and that one didn't, why a documented diagnosis is or isn't supported by the clinical picture, what a reviewer should have looked at before deciding. That written reasoning is the training signal, so vague notes like "documentation insufficient" are worth almost nothing here.

Expect a mix of case review and standards work. Some weeks you're clearing a queue; others you're in discussion with the project team about an edge case that two reviewers scored differently, or helping tighten a rubric so the next hundred cases get labeled consistently. Sepsis criteria, observation versus inpatient status, HCC-relevant specificity, present-on-admission determinations, and CC/MCC capture are the kinds of recurring flashpoints where reviewer disagreement usually lives.

What the screen looks for

  • Real attending-level hospitalist time, not adjacent inpatient exposure. The screen probes for the volume and setting of your practice and how recent it is.
  • Structured review experience — utilization review, CDI, peer review, medical audit, or a formal QA program. You should be able to name the criteria sets you worked against (InterQual, MCG, CMS conditions of participation, coding guidelines) and where they broke down.
  • Reasoning that survives follow-up. Expect the interviewer to push back on your answer and see whether you refine your position with clinical specifics or simply restate it.
  • Calibration instinct — comfort with the idea that your individual opinion matters less than a defensible, reproducible standard.

Logistics

Fully remote and contractor-based. Work is largely asynchronous through a review platform, with periodic live sessions for calibration and difficult-case discussion; some of those may be recorded, since verbal articulation of reasoning is itself part of the deliverable. Hours are flexible and typically part-time alongside clinical practice — most reviewers commit a defined block per week rather than ad hoc time. Volume can be uneven: throughput expectations rise and fall with the customer's project phases.