How VetCaseIQ Is Being Evaluated
We use published clinical pathology cases to evaluate whether VetCaseIQ identifies and appropriately prioritizes the leading diagnostic explanation from the information available at presentation.
Retrospective internal benchmark
How each case is tested
Case selection
Published eClinPath Diagnostic Challenge or Case of the Month cases are selected for retrospective testing.
Information control
Only clinical information available before the published diagnosis or interpretation is used as VetCaseIQ input whenever the source format permits.
Report generation
VetCaseIQ generates a structured differential-support report from the available case information.
Top-differential comparison
The highest-ranked VetCaseIQ differential is compared with the published leading diagnosis, diagnostic category, or principal interpretation.
Secondary quality review
Each report is also reviewed for evidence grounding, contradictory findings, missing-information handling, differential prioritization, do-not-miss appropriateness, diagnostic-status awareness, wording, formatting, and literature relevance.
Failure inclusion
All fully reviewed eligible cases remain in the denominator. Difficult cases and non-aligned results must not be silently removed.
What this result means
- Each fully reviewed case listed on this page shows exactly what its top-ranked VetCaseIQ differential was and whether it aligned with the published leading diagnosis, category, or interpretation.
- Where alignment occurred, it demonstrates consistent identification of the central diagnostic concern within this limited retrospective case set.
- The benchmark provides an early development signal for continued testing — including cases where alignment did not occur.
What this result does not mean
- It does not mean every report was free from wording or prioritization issues.
- It does not mean every secondary differential was ranked perfectly.
- It does not mean every supporting statement was equally strong.
- It does not mean VetCaseIQ has been prospectively validated in clinical practice.
- It does not mean the result applies to every veterinary case.
- It does not mean the tool replaces veterinary judgment.
- It does not mean Cornell University or eClinPath evaluated, approved, or endorsed VetCaseIQ.
Every fully reviewed case, in full
Every case contributing to the benchmark above appears here. Titles link to the original published case on eClinPath.
Loading case results…
What this benchmark can't tell you
Current results are based on a limited, retrospectively selected educational case set. Published cases may be more complete, diagnostically focused, or educationally curated compared with cases encountered in routine practice. A correct top differential does not mean that every secondary differential, supporting statement, question, or report section was optimal. Results may also change as the report engine evolves. Prospective evaluation with practicing veterinarians and real-world clinical workflows is still needed.
Support, not replacement
VetCaseIQ is designed to support veterinary professionals by organizing case information into structured reports for review. It does not replace the attending veterinarian, establish a veterinarian-client-patient relationship, or provide final diagnoses or treatment decisions. AI can make mistakes, so every report should be checked against the original records and interpreted with professional judgment. The attending veterinarian remains solely responsible for all clinical decisions.
See how VetCaseIQ organizes a case
View a full example report, or request free pilot access to test VetCaseIQ on your own de-identified cases.