Explicit negation
No pneumonia diagnosis proposal. The condition is explicitly negated in this example.
THE CODING COMPANION · ICD-10-CM & CPT®
Codes grounded in your clinical words.
Moxcares proposes codes supported by the note you wrote. See the source sentence, review the proposal and decide what joins the visit’s coding tray—before you sign.
- Cited to your documentation
- Accepted by a person
- Connected to the claim
A PROPOSAL WITH A SOURCE
YOUR CLINICAL NOTE / ASSESSMENT & PLANA clinician-documented diagnosis or procedure.Source sentence
ICD-10-CM & CPT®Check the source.
Choose what belongs.
Choose what belongs.
Accept or dismiss before a proposal joins the visit's coding tray.
Illustrative workflow · Human review required
FOLLOW THE EVIDENCE
See what earns a proposal.
Compare a clinician assertion with negation, family history and patient-reported intake. Then try accepting or dismissing the sample.
Note → proposal → reviewIllustrative workflow
DOCUMENTATION EXAMPLE
A diagnosis or procedure explicitly documented in the clinician’s Assessment or Plan.
ICD-10-CM / CPT® PROPOSAL
Supported by the documented words.
A proposal links back to the supporting sentence. Review it before accepting it into the visit’s coding tray.
Coding tray 0Review before signing
No patient entry. No real codes or records.
WHERE THE WORK CONNECTS
One documented fact. A clearer path to billing.
ICD-10-CM and CPT® proposals stay close to the record and the people responsible for reviewing them.
- 01
In the chart, while you write
Finish an Assessment or Plan and review proposals beside the field. Each one points to the sentence that supports it. Accept it into the visit’s coding tray or dismiss it; the tray stays visible before signing.
- 02
On the problem list
Look up a code inline when adding a problem. Keep the selected code with that problem across visits, without treating it as an automatically billable diagnosis for every encounter.
- 03
In the claim composer
Bring the note’s reviewed codes into claim preparation. Billing staff review procedure lines, diagnosis order and payer requirements before applying or submitting anything. Source context stays available.
CLEAR BOUNDARIES
Coding assistance that respects the documentation.
A possibility, a symptom or someone else’s history is not silently turned into a diagnosis for the patient.
Family history
Not treated as the patient’s own diagnosis. Appropriate family-history coding is a separate question for review.
Documented symptom
No unstated disease is proposed. A symptom may be coded as documented; the companion does not invent its cause.
Patient-reported intake
Patient-reported content stays separate. The companion waits for a clinician’s assertion before it enters the coding tray.
When a proposal is withheld, the reason appears where you work. When the supported index path offers a more specific option, you see it and decide.
EVIDENCE THROUGH THE HANDOFF
Follow a code back to the words that support it.
Keep the source sentence, proposal and acceptance history together. Clinicians review in context; billing staff can see the documentation behind the handoff.
- Source sentenceSee the words behind the proposal.
- Person who acceptedHuman review remains attributable.
- Time of acceptanceFollow the decision in the activity history.
LICENSED CONTENT. EFFECTIVE DATES.
Authoritative code sets. Editions that matter.
Less lookup work. A clearer clinical-to-billing handoff. Evidence available when a coding question arises.
AMA-licensed content.
Moxcares uses AMA-licensed CPT content under a signed agreement. Annual editions are prepared ahead of their effective dates, with daily checks that alert the team to upcoming code-set boundaries.
CPT resources from the AMASource editions. Supported index paths.
Tabular List and Alphabetic Index editions come from CMS and CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics. The companion follows the supported index path from clinician documentation.
ICD-10-CM files from CDC/NCHSA future edition is not valid for earlier services simply because it is available. Confirm the edition applicable to the encounter. A terminology license does not imply AMA endorsement or guarantee claim payment.
BEFORE YOU DECIDE
A few useful answers.
Does the companion diagnose patients?
No. It proposes coding from clinician-asserted documentation. It does not infer an unstated diagnosis. Clinical judgment remains with the clinician.
Are ICD-10-CM and CPT® proposals applied automatically?
No. A person accepts or dismisses each proposal. Claim preparation and submission also require the appropriate human review.
What if a more specific code may be appropriate?
The companion can surface a more specific option supported by the documentation and index path. It explains the option; the reviewer decides.
Can patient intake populate the coding tray by itself?
No. Patient-reported content remains separate from the clinician’s assertions. It does not enter the companion’s coding tray solely because a patient mentioned it.
Does this guarantee a clean or paid claim?
No. Documentation, applicable coding guidance, coverage and payer requirements still need review. The companion supports that work; it does not replace it.
Keep reading
Blog
Orthopedic patient intake: prepare the chart before the visit
Connect patient answers, referral documents and clinician-reviewed proposals in an orthopedic practice.
Blog
Best EHR for small orthopedic practices: compare the workflows that matter
Compare AdvancedMD, athenaOne, CureMD and Moxcares for a small orthopedic practice. Evaluate imaging, injury documentation, referrals, scheduling and complete costs.
Blog
Best EHR for small primary care practices: a practical comparison
Compare Elation, Tebra, athenaOne, Practice Fusion and Moxcares for a small primary care practice, with workflow tests, pricing units and questions to ask.
YOUR NOTE. A CLEARER HANDOFF.
See the coding workflow.
Explore documentation, proposals and human review using a fictional or de-identified example.
Book a coding workflow demoCPT® is a registered trademark of the American Medical Association.