The clinical question comes first
We clarify what you want the review to answer, then identify the records and imaging the physicians need.
Why WHITEGLOVEMD
Two expert perspectives on your heart-surgery decision.
A cardiac surgeon and cardiologist independently review the required records and imaging, then co-sign one patient-facing report.
Request a complimentary call
Free conversation. No obligation to purchase.
View packages & pricing
Purchase online. No call required.
No referral or records are needed to request a complimentary call.
THE REVIEW MODELIndependent first.
Co-signed at the end.
Co-signed at the end.
Built for the next conversation with your treating team.
Required case materialRecords and imaging organized around the clinical question
Two independent reviewsCardiac surgery and cardiology perspectives
One co-signed reportWritten for the patient and treating team
The difference
Understand the recommendation. See the reasoning.
Records, specialty perspectives, and written reasoning stay connected from the first clinical question to the final report.
Two specialties review independently
Each physician brings a distinct clinical lens before the findings are brought together.
Both physicians sign one report
The final written opinion is co-signed, not split across disconnected notes or separate handoffs.
Uncertainty stays visible
The report separates documented findings, physician reasoning, reasonable options, and what the available record cannot settle.
One case. Two clinical lenses.
Independent first. Reconciled before it reaches you.
Each physician reviews the required case material through a different specialty lens. The final report brings those perspectives together and identifies the physicians who performed the review.
Meet the physician-led teamOperative indication, approach, alternatives, and surgical considerations.
Diagnosis, testing, medical and catheter-based options, and timing.
One patient-facing report
WHITEGLOVE Insights™ILLUSTRATIVE STRUCTURENO PATIENT DATA
INDEPENDENT CARDIAC SECOND OPINION
The decision in front of you.
What does the available record support—and what still needs clarification?
01Clinical picture
02Two perspectives
03Options and tradeoffs
04Questions for your team
A report you can use
The conclusion comes with the reasoning.
The report organizes what is documented, how the two physicians interpret it, which options may be relevant, and what still belongs in the conversation with your treating team.
- 01
Record-groundedKey findings stay connected to the materials reviewed.
- 02
Plain-languageClinical reasoning is organized for patients and families.
- 03
Clear boundariesUnknowns remain visible instead of becoming false certainty.
A clear standard
Nothing important is implied.
Before the review begins, the source material, reviewing physicians, written output, and service boundary should be easy to understand.
- 01Source material
- The required records and imaging for the question being reviewed.
- 02Clinical authors
- The cardiac surgeon and cardiologist who performed the review.
- 03Written output
- One patient-facing report, reviewed and co-signed by both physicians.
A simple place to begin
Start with what still feels unresolved.
Tell us what was recommended and what you still need to understand. We will explain what an independent review would require.
Start with a free conversation, or choose your review online.
Not for urgent or emergency care.