A source-backed clinic directory built for trust.
A full-stack healthcare directory that helps people find clinics, compare treatments, and share experiences without becoming an unreliable, anyone-can-post medical directory.
The problem
People researching dry-eye care piece together clinic information, treatment claims, and patient experiences from scattered sources.
Most clinic information is marketing copy, making it difficult to know which treatment claims are credible and which nearby providers actually offer a specific option.
What I built
- A clinic directory searchable by city, country, and treatment, with evidence and review status tracked for each treatment claim.
- Plain-language treatment guides backed by references where available.
- Lightweight community surveys and structured patient-experience submissions.
- A private, allowlisted admin workflow for reviewing clinic data, evidence, and community claims before publication.
A live product, not a concept.
Selected public views from the production platform show the experience from discovery through detailed clinic comparison.
The key decision
I modeled a clinic separately from each treatment claim attached to it. A clinic can be listed while an individual claim remains under review, with its own source and verification status. Research automation only creates private drafts; a human makes every publishing decision.
Result
A live, scalable platform covering clinics, treatments, and locations across Canada and the U.S., designed so new cities and treatments can be added without rebuilding the underlying architecture.
What this proves
- End-to-end product ownership, from an ambiguous healthcare discovery problem to a working production platform.
- A practical use of automation with structured intake, automatic validation, and deliberate human review.