Evaluation

What your organisation can decide after the pilot.

Quinn is assessed in your documentation workflow, not in a standalone demo. Together, we examine whether drafts are understandable, require less rework and fit safely into existing review and handoff processes.

Discuss the evaluation View pilot program

AI outputs remain drafts and are professionally reviewed before use.

Quinn complements existing care systems instead of replacing them.

The processing path, roles and responsibilities are clarified before use.

The organisation receives a traceable evaluation instead of generic value claims.

What your organisation evaluates

Practical criteria for a well-founded decision.

The evaluation combines time, quality and team effort. This shows not only whether Quinn is faster, but whether documentation becomes clearer and easier to review in daily work.

Minutes per case

Time from conversation, audio or notes to a reviewable draft.

Edit rate

How much needs to be completed or corrected before the draft is professionally suitable?

Completeness

How reliably do open facts, risks, wishes and gaps become visible?

Care/QM review effort

How does the effort for review and follow-up change for care leadership, quality teams and professionals?

Team acceptance

Is the workflow understandable and does the team use Quinn repeatedly?

For your decision

What should be clear at the end of a pilot.

You receive a traceable basis for deciding whether and where Quinn fits your organisation, roles and existing system.

Everyday usability: the team can use Quinn reliably in one defined workflow.

Less rework: drafts mainly need targeted additions instead of complete rewriting.

Documentation quality: open facts and potential gaps are visible before approval.

Review workload: professionals, care leadership and quality teams can trace changes and open points.

Adoption readiness: roles, processing path, training and handoff to the existing system are clear for the organisation.

Quinn wird geladen...

Quinn

DE EN