The Data Health dashboard is how we flag inconsistencies and potential inaccuracies we find while processing data synced from services you've connected to Medfin.

These give you a high-level overview of your overall data quality.

Total issues is a count of how many different issues currently present in your data.

Critical issues are the issues we recommend you start tackling immediately. We'll discuss issue categorisation in more detail below.

Estimated impact is the total financial impact of all data quality issues on your Medfin figures. It's important to note that this is not the impact we predict these issues will have on your practice's production. It's an indication of how much these issues are likely to impact metrics you see on the platform.

Each issue we've detected will be displayed as a card within the Data Health dashboard.

Each card will contain a title and brief description of the issue, as well as an example of where we've seen the issue occur. Where possible, we'll provide a link to at least one problematic record in the source system to help you better understand how the issue occurs.

Some issues will also display a chart illustrating the prevalence of the issue over time. We'd recommend using this to track progress when you make process changes to resolve data quality issues.

We broadly categorise each data quality issue we encounter into one of three buckets: critical issues, warnings and issues flagged for information only.

Critical issues are those we recommend you begin resolving immediately. These are issues that are most likely to drastically impact the metrics we display on Medfin.

Warnings are issues that generally indicate areas where the source system is not being used optimally to get the most out of Medfin. These will generally have a lower overall impact on the numbers we display on platform. Following resolution guidance for warnings will usually also result in improvements to internal processes, making non-Medfin operations smoother as well as improving the accuracy of the metrics displayed on platform.

Not every issue requires immediate attention. Where Medfin can correct for a given data quality issue, we will display it on the dashboard with the Info label. We would still recommend resolving these issues where possible, as they will likely be impacting reporting within the source system or in non-Medfin integrations or workflows.

There are three ways issues may be resolved when encoutered.

Some issues are able to be fixed automatically via API. Where this is possible, we will provide a button labelled 'Fix now' that will allow Medfin to resolve the issues on your behalf. The platform will outline the steps required to fix the issue and request confirmation before taking any action.

Other issues can be fixed manually immediately. Generally these are issues where the source data can be edited via the source system's application, but not via API. In this case, Medfin will link to relevant documentation providing guidance on how to resolve the issues and how to adjust your processes to mitigate the issue in the future.

The last set of issues are thosed that can not be altered historically, and must be fixed with a process change. These are issues where the data in the source system cannot be changed (often the case with financial information such as invoices or payments). These can only be resolved by adjusting your processes to follow the best practices of how to use the source system.

See below for an up-to-date list of the issues we currently surface within Medfin and how we recommend resolving them.

This issue is flagged when a treatment within Dentally is linked to an appointment more than two weeks apart from when the treatment was marked as completed. This usually indicates that a set of treatments are linked to the wrong appointment.

In the above example, the exam and x-ray treatments were completed on January 21st 2026, but the linked appointment is for December 10th 2025 (shown in top right). This indicates that either the treatments are linked to the incorrect appointment or the completion date is incorrect.

We use linked appointment data as the basis for a number of metrics. This issue is classified as a critical issue due to its wide-ranging effects.

To resolve this, ensure that treatments are marked as completed during the appointment or shortly afterwards, and that appointment links are correct.

We consider a treatment item to be isolated when it has been marked as completed but has no linked appointment. This is often done by orthodontic practitioners to invoice for more expensive treatments without having to link to a specific appointment.

This makes it impossible to determine when work was actually completed, and may result in production being assigned to incorrect dates.

Our recommendation is to keep treatments linked to the appointment where they took place. Where possible, create specific treatment codes to denote different stages of longer processes, e.g. 'Invisalign Assessment', 'Invisalign Review', 'Invisalign Fit' rather than simply 'Invisalign'. This will make it easier to charge patients at the correct points in their journey while enabling accurate tracking of income and production.

This issue is flagged when we spot a clinical treatment assigned to a user with a non-clinical role within the PMS, e.g. an administrator or receptionist.

These treatments will be excluded from any parts of the Medfin platform that focus on clinician activity, such as associates pages and hygienist/therapist pages.

The most common case of this is where a treatment coordinator has been responsible for constructing a given treatment plan, but has not assigned work correctly, or the treating clinician has failed to mark the treatment as complete.

This can be fixed by re-assigning the treatment to the correct practitioner in the PMS.

This issue is very prevalent in dental groups that have practitioners working across multiple practices that share a Dentally instance. Due to a quirk of the Dentally UI, it's trivially easy to assign the Dentally practitioner for Joe Bloggs at Site A to a treatment done by Joe Bloggs at Site B.

This happens because the practitioners available for a given treatment is based on the site currently selected in the top right of Dentally, not the site where a given treatment took place.

This results in invoices often being attributed to the correct person at the wrong site, causing discrepancies in the income attributed to each site within Dentally.

The recommended fix is to take care when assigning practitioners to treatments. Unfortunately, this is a fundamental issue in the design of Dentally, and is a very easy mistake to make. We've provided this feedback to the team at Henry Schein One, and we hope to see changes to Dentally to make accurate data collection easier going forwards.