FIVE X FIVE · DEMO BUILD 2407
by GNOSIS
Record sealedSHA-256HMAC-SHA256Hash-chainedTamper-evidentPrivacy-firstAuthorized accessca-central-1 Record sealedSHA-256HMAC-SHA256Hash-chainedTamper-evidentPrivacy-firstAuthorized accessca-central-1
Five x Five · Encounter record · ● Sealed --:--:-- NT · ca-central-1

Prove
what was
said.

Sealed ✓tamper-evident · ca-central-1

In radio, “five by five” means your signal is coming through perfectly: loud and clear. Your medical record deserves the same. Right now, AI scribes are writing millions of notes with no independent check, and one wrong note is a huge liability and a professional reputation crisis waiting to happen. Five x Five is not another scribe. It works beside yours: it seals what was said in the room, then verifies the chart against that sealed record live, flagging every discrepancy for the clinician to review. The black box for the exam room. So when a record is ever questioned, you never rely on memory or word against word. Trust is a feeling. Proof is a fact.

The cryptography on this page is real. Recompute it yourself on the last screen.
Built in Newfoundland and Labrador by a clinician trained in medical ethics and charting at Waterford Hospital.
Exhibit A · live ledger ca-central-1 #1,251
Each block is sealed with a live SHA-256 hash and chained to the one before it.
Why now

Clinicians are carrying an impossible load.The scribe is a lifeline.No one meant for the safety net to vanish with it.

A clinician reaches for an AI scribe because the documentation burden is crushing, and it helps. The quiet assumption underneath is that they will read every line it writes. But between a full panel, constant interruptions, and burnout, that careful read is the first thing the day takes away. The note enters the chart, and no one is told it can be checked. This is not a lapse in care. It is a gap in the system, and it is the gap Five x Five closes.

0%
of US physicians reported a burnout symptom in 2025, close to 50% in emergency medicine. The person meant to catch an error is the most stretched one in the room.
AMA, 2026
0%
less after-hours charting once a scribe is in place. That relief is real and hard-won, which is exactly why no one wants to add review time back on top.
QI study, 45 clinicians, 2025
0/20
approved AI scribes missed key mental-health details in Ontario's 2026 audit. The errors are not hypothetical, and they cluster in the areas that matter most.
Auditor General of Ontario, 2026
The bind
The scribe gives time back, and the old safety net assumed there was time to read every line. An overloaded day removes exactly that read, and nothing sits in the gap right now.
No one is told
The patient is never told the note can be verified. The institution is never given a way to prove it is true. The record is trusted because no one has a way to check it.
The bill that has not arrived
An unchecked record is a liability you have not been billed for yet. Five x Five seals the source at the moment of care so it can be proven, not trusted. Ethics and privacy first.
01 · Connect

Works beside any scribe

We do not replace your scribe, and we never need its transcript. Five x Five captures its own record at the moment of care and seals it. Any scribe's note is then held up to that sealed truth.

1
Independent capture. Five x Five records its own structured account in the room. It never reads the scribe's transcript, so it cannot inherit the scribe's mistakes.
2
Sealed at the source. That account is hashed and sealed the instant care ends, before any note exists to argue with.
3
Held to the seal. The scribe's finished note is checked line by line against the sealed source. Matches pass, conflicts get flagged.
Linked. Five x Five is now sealing every encounter.
Every scribe, held to one sealed source.
02 · Capture and seal

Seal the source the instant it happens

As care happens, the encounter becomes a structured, time-stamped record. One tap seals it with a cryptographic hash computed from its exact contents.

Example · Mental health
Encounter · behavioral health follow-up · sealed sourceCapturing…
01Reports low mood and disrupted sleep for three weeks.
02Reports passive thoughts of self-harm this week. No plan, no intent.
03Taking sertraline 50 mg. Reports nausea.
04Safety plan discussed. Follow-up in one week.
SEALED
Record sealedSHA-256HMAC-SHA256Hash-chainedTimestamped
Chained to previous sealed block
SHA-256 hash of this record
computing…
This record is sealed to the block before it. Change one character and this hash changes, which is exactly how the seal catches a rewrite.
03 · Protect

Hold the note to the truth

The scribe's note is checked against the sealed source. Every line gets one of three verdicts. No fourth answer, and nothing to take on faith.

Example · Mental health
AI scribe note · checked against sealed source4 claims
Reports low mood and poor sleep.VERIFIED
Patient denies any thoughts of self-harm.REFUTED
Taking sertraline 50 mg.VERIFIED
Reports feeling much improved.UNVERIFIABLE

Caught before sign-off. The note records that the patient denies self-harm. The sealed source shows they reported it. That single reversal is the error that follow-up care is built on, and it never reaches the chart unflagged.

04 · Both sides

One sealed record. Everyone it protects.

The clinician, the institution, and the patient are protected by the same record, sealed once. Tap to see both sides of it.

Press me ⇋
For the clinician and the institution

A backup that does not add work.

The independent check runs as care happens, so no one has to review every line. If a note is ever questioned, you hold a sealed record that already flagged it. A complete, audit-ready trail, and early signal before a problem becomes a settlement.

Defensible by default. Liability, contained.
For the patient and family

Your record. And the proof it is real.

You hold a verifiable copy and can confirm it yourself, without taking the vendor's word for it. A parent can hold a verified copy of a child's record, the exact thing the new provincial law is being written to protect.

Heard the first time. A record that holds.
05 · Prove it

Don't trust. Verify.

Here is the record and its seal. An authorized holder can recompute the hash and confirm nothing was altered. Change one character and watch the seal break. This runs live, right now, in your browser.

Example · Mental health
Sealed record · contentsoriginal

            
Sealed hash (SHA-256, captured at seal time)
AWAITING
Recompute the seal to confirm the record is intact.
The black box for high-stakes care. Sealed. Independent. Privacy first.
Five x Five · GNOSIS · Loud, clear, & provable · Built in Newfoundland and Labrador
The evidence

Don't just trust us.
Trust the record.

In every pro sport, a disputed call goes to the booth. There is a camera, there is a tape, and the replay settles it. In medicine right now, the call gets made with no camera, and then the tape gets deleted. The problem is not that AI scribes make errors. Every source below proves they do. The problem is that no one can prove what the record got wrong, because the source is already gone. We do not sell accuracy. We sell proof.

17/20
approved AI scribes missed key details · Ontario AG, 2026
795K
killed or disabled by diagnostic error yearly, US · BMJ, 2023
22
sources on this page · every claim linked
4
countries · 3 government bodies · 6 peer-reviewed
The objection · 01
“Come on, the scribe checks the note itself.”

It does not. An ambient scribe transcribes and summarizes. There is no step that compares the note back to what was said, or to the chart. That is not our opinion, it is why every regulator puts the burden on the human. Ontario’s Auditor General’s only fix was to force a clinician to attest by hand that they reviewed the note. NHS England guidance calls the clinician the “liability sink” for the AI’s output. Australia’s safety regulator found the same audio can produce different summaries. A system that cannot reproduce its own output is not checking anything. Verification is a separate job. It is the one Five x Five does.

Read the Auditor General’s report ↗
The objection · 02
“Wrong information would get caught before it hits the chart.”

It is already reaching charts uncaught. Ontario’s Auditor General found 12 of 20 approved systems recorded a different drug than the doctor prescribed. In California, a class action alleges the ambient AI (Abridge) wrote consent statements into more than 100,000 patient charts, saying patients had agreed to be recorded when they had not. Doctors Manitoba documented a scribe adding a symptom the patient had denied. And when JAMA had roughly 23,000 patients read their own notes, 1 in 5 found an error and 42% called it serious, caught only because the patient happened to read it. The safety net today is that someone notices. That is luck, not a system. We replace it with proof.

See the Sharp Healthcare lawsuit ↗
01The audit nobody can argue withgovernment testing
Jeffords, S. (2026, May 13). Medical AI transcriber for Ontario doctors 'hallucinated,' generated errors: auditor general. CBC News.
Ontario tested 20 approved AI scribe vendors. Every one produced inaccuracies. The auditor's own fix was a forced attestation that a human reviewed the note. That is verification, and it did not exist.
View source ↗
Hauen, J. (2026, May 12). Most Ontario-approved medical AI scribes erred in tests: auditor general. The Trillium.
Sixty percent recorded a different drug than prescribed. Nine of 20 invented treatment steps never discussed. Accuracy was worth 4% of the procurement score. A vendor's domestic presence in Ontario was worth 30%. The market rewarded everything except being right.
View source ↗
Global News. (2026, May 12). AI systems used by Ontario doctors hallucinate, auditor general finds.
The auditor's office confirmed it saw no evidence the systems were tested after purchase. Buying the tool is not the same as trusting it.
View source ↗
Doctors Manitoba. (2026, May 14). AI Scribe: a reminder on your accuracy obligations.
A fourth authority, a different province, the same conclusion. Physicians are told they are responsible for accuracy “regardless of whether it is first drafted by you, an AI scribe, or a human assistant,” and to double-check every scribe note. Documented failures include a scribe adding a symptom the patient had denied. The safety net is the clinician. That is the gap.
View source ↗
02It is the technology, not one bad apppeer-reviewed & investigative
Koenecke, A., et al. (2024). Careless Whisper: Speech-to-text hallucination harms. Proceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. Reported in Healthcare Brew.
A Cornell-led team found OpenAI's Whisper invents content in roughly 1% of transcriptions, and 38% of those hallucinations included explicit harms: invented medications, false statements, even violent phrases. It hallucinates most on patients with speech disorders and disrupted speech. The model fails the people who can least afford it.
View source ↗
Burke, G., & Schellmann, H. (2024, October 26), via Fortune. OpenAI's transcription tool hallucinates more than any other, experts say, but hospitals keep using it. Fortune.
An Associated Press investigation found a Whisper-based scribe already used for around 7 million patient visits. One developer found hallucinations in nearly all of 26,000 transcripts. A University of Michigan researcher found them in 8 of every 10.
View source ↗
CIO. (2024, October 29). Patients may suffer from hallucinations of AI medical transcription tools.
The commercial Whisper-based product deletes the original audio after transcribing. The doctor signs a note they cannot check against anything. This is the whole case in one sentence: the system erases the only proof of what was said.
View source ↗
03Patients are already catching the errorspeer-reviewed
Bell, S. K., et al. (2020). Frequency and types of patient-reported errors in electronic health record ambulatory care notes. JAMA Network Open, 3(6).
Across roughly 23,000 patients who read their own notes, 1 in 5 found a mistake and 42% of those called it serious. The worst errors were in diagnoses, medications, and test results. Today the safety net is the patient noticing. That is not a system. That is luck.
View source ↗
04The brakes are on, in every marketregulators & professional bodies
Digital Health News. (2025, June). BMA warns GPs on the 'substantial' risks of AI scribing tools.
The British Medical Association told GPs to pause AI scribes until safety and data checks are done, following a priority warning from NHS England's chief clinical information officer. When the doctors' own union says stop, the accuracy story has lost the room.
View source ↗
Evans, T., & Hogg, J. (2025). NHS England guidance on AI scribes. British Dental Journal, 239(3), 154.
The journal names the trap precisely: the clinician becomes the "liability sink" for the AI's output, accountable for every error the machine writes. A liability sink with no way to check the source is a malpractice claim waiting for a date.
View source ↗
NHS England. (2026, March 31). Using AI-enabled ambient scribing products in health and care settings. NHS Transformation Directorate.
Even official NHS guidance contemplates deleting the original recording once a human signs off, keeping only the summary. If the summary is later disputed, the evidence is already gone. A signature is not proof of accuracy.
View source ↗
Surrey and Sussex LMCs. (2025). AI ambient scribing: NHS England warning and provisional guidance.
NHS England issued a priority notification that non-compliant scribe products on the market today pose risks to clinical safety, and told organisations not to use tools that fail the standard. The regulator named the gap. We close it.
View source ↗
Healthcare IT News. What Australian GPs should consider before adopting AI scribes.
Australia's college of GPs tells doctors to consult their malpractice insurer before switching on a scribe, and confirms the doctor is fully liable for AI errors. President Dr Nicole Higgins: the tools make mistakes and cannot replace the clinician's documentation work.
View source ↗
Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care. (2025, August). AI safety scenario: Ambient scribe (Version 1.0).
A national safety regulator published a formal warning: the same consultation can produce different summaries from the same audio, and a scribe suggesting a diagnosis nobody mentioned may cross into being a regulated medical device. Output you cannot reproduce is, by definition, output you cannot verify.
View source ↗
CHOICE. (2025, November 14). AI is increasingly invading our medical privacy as regulation struggles to keep up.
The college warns that with profit-driven vendors, "value to technology company shareholders might be prioritised over patient outcomes." Professor Enrico Coiera adds that most of these tools are sold as general-purpose software and were never assessed for safe medical use. The market has no referee.
View source ↗
Evaluation of AI scribes in medical practice: Cross-regional analysis. (2025). PMC.
A UK and Australia survey found only 42% of practitioners knew their own insurer's position on AI scribes, while 70% flagged accuracy risk and 64% flagged legal risk. Most clinicians are carrying a risk they have not priced.
View source ↗
05The lawyers have arrivedlitigation & carriers
MobiHealthNews. (2025, December 26). Patient files lawsuit against Sharp Healthcare for ambient AI use.
A proposed class action covering an estimated 100,000 recorded encounters. The detail that should stop every health system cold: the ambient AI (Abridge) inserted statements into charts saying patients had been told about the recording and consented, when the patient says it never happened. The record fabricated its own consent.
View source ↗
Kahf, U., & Kays, D. (2025, December 9). New class action targets healthcare AI recordings: 6 steps all businesses should consider to limit exposure. Fisher Phillips.
The defense bar's read: simply capturing audio and sending it to a vendor can be enough for liability, and most vendor contracts push consent, notice, and deletion duties onto the provider. Their top recommended fix is to "build a fast, verifiable deletion workflow." Verifiable. That word again.
View source ↗
Medscape Medical News. (2026, January 16). Health system sued over AI scribe technology, patient consent.
Legal scholars note there is still no federal law governing AI scribes in the exam room, leaving a state-by-state patchwork. Thirteen states require all-party consent, so one national workflow can be lawful in one state and a crime in the next.
View source ↗
06The stakes: what a wrong record costspeer-reviewed
Newman-Toker, D. E., et al. (2023). Burden of serious harms from diagnostic error in the USA. BMJ Quality & Safety, 33(2), 109-120.
An estimated 795,000 Americans die or are permanently disabled every year from diagnostic error: 371,000 deaths and 424,000 disabilities. Diagnosis starts with what gets written down. When the record is wrong, the error compounds from there.
View source ↗
Makary, M. A., & Daniel, M. (2016). Medical error: the third leading cause of death in the US. Johns Hopkins Medicine.
Johns Hopkins placed medical error behind only heart disease and cancer as a cause of death in the US, more than 250,000 lives a year. Documentation and handoff failures sit near the center of that number.
View source ↗
07The bridge to a US buyertranslation
Notiro AI. (2026). AI scribes face legal scrutiny: what the Ontario auditor general report means for US physicians.
A US-focused breakdown of the Ontario findings: most jurisdictions hold the clinician responsible for the record no matter how it was generated, and 60% of tested systems logged the wrong drug. The audit was Canadian. The liability it describes lands on every American clinician who signs an unverified note.
View source ↗
21 sources · 4 countries · 3 government bodies · 6 peer-reviewed · 3 live legal filings. The record can lie about itself. We make that impossible to do quietly.
Meet the roster
K.M. Hogan, founder of Five x Five
St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador
The Trust Architect
K.M. Hogan
Founder & CEO, GNOSIS Ethical Intelligence · M.A. Counselling Psychology
kaley@gnosisethical.com

The training. A therapist, crisis manager, and mother of four, she trained at the Waterford Hospital through the Department of Ethics, with work in inpatient psychiatry and Employee Assistance. She learned to chart accurately and to notice the gaps, where what was said and what was written diverge.

The build. She founded GNOSIS to close that gap: a sealed, independently verifiable record of what was known, decided, and done, that holds up without anyone having to take it on trust. Trust, when it matters most, is not a feeling. It is a file. Five x Five is that record for healthcare.

The team
Madiha
The Systems Architect
Madiha
Software Engineer · Product and Cloud Systems
madiha@gnosisethical.com

Builds the surfaces people actually use, the front end and the services behind it. A Computer Engineering degree and a Master of Technology Management in progress at Memorial University of Newfoundland, an AWS Certified Cloud Practitioner, and prior software engineering at the National Research Council of Canada.

Sumaiya
The Integrity Architect
Sumaiya
Data and Quality Engineer
sumaiya@gnosisethical.com

Keeps the record honest. Her expertise is data integrity: the testing and validation that make sure what is captured is accurate and holds up under review. A Master of Science in Data Science in progress at Memorial University of Newfoundland, with data-quality work at Siftmed.

Briagh
The Narrative Architect
Briagh
Communications and Public Relations

Reads how people and institutions actually behave, and finds the language and images that land with them. Completing a Bachelor of Public Relations at Mount Saint Vincent University, provincial winner of the 2024 Arts and Letters Award in Visual Arts, and five years on the Youth Advisory Committee at the Janeway Children's Health Centre.

The AI Initiative · Fall 2026 · MUN School of Graduate Studies
Jasleen
The Clinical Architect
Jasleen
Clinical Informatics and Data Integration

A data engineer whose speciality is integrity: the validation and reconciliation that prove a record matches its source. Production experience in ETL, data quality and automated audit tooling, and a Master of Computer Science in progress at Memorial University of Newfoundland.

Soma
The Evidence Architect
Soma
AI Verification Engineer

A systems engineer focused on verification, making the behaviour of a live system observable rather than assumed. Six years of production engineering across distributed services and cloud infrastructure, fluent with large language models, prompt engineering and grounded retrieval.

Ahmed
The Ledger Architect
Ahmed
Cloud and Cryptographic Systems Engineer

A systems engineer working in applied cryptography: the guarantees that make a record tamper evident. Security-conscious systems software in modern C++, with depth in applied cryptography, protocol design and distributed systems.

Sanamjan
The Platform Architect
Sanamjan
AI Platform and Integration Engineer

A senior data scientist working where models meet production data, with expertise in anomaly detection and risk scoring at enterprise scale. Two master's degrees and techNL certification in securing large language models against prompt-injection and access-control risk.

Waterford Hospital · Ethics Department Training · Built from Paradise, Newfoundland and Labrador
A GNOSIS product

Five x Five is built by GNOSIS.

GNOSIS builds accountability infrastructure: the black box for human systems. When a consequential decision happens, GNOSIS captures it as a sealed, independently verifiable record. Less intelligence. More proof.

Don't trust. Verify.Sealed · SHA-256 · HMAC-SHA256
Launch the GNOSIS Ethical Health appPrivate trial · same access key as this site
A physician charts at a computer while listening to a patient RECORD SEALED · 14:32 CHART VERIFIED ✓
The room where the record is made
01
What GNOSIS does

The moment a decision is made, the proof of how it was made starts to disappear.

Flip ↻
The engine

GNOSIS seals consequential moments with real cryptography, SHA-256 hash chains and HMAC-SHA256 signatures, so what was said, decided, and delivered can be verified by anyone, later, without trusting whoever holds the database. Five x Five is the health record application of that engine. CIVIC applies it to community emergency management in Newfoundland and Labrador.

02
Why now

Canada just bet $2 billion on AI. Adoption is funded. Verification is not.

Flip ↻
The moment

On June 4, 2026, Prime Minister Mark Carney launched AI for All, Canada's national AI strategy: roughly $2 billion in new investment, a 60 per cent adoption target by 2034, and a $200 million health-focused AI mission, announced from the floor of a Toronto hospital. The strategy promises AI “adopted responsibly, in a way that truly serves all Canadians.” When AI writes into the records that decide care, benefits, and liability, that promise needs a layer that can prove what happened. That layer is what GNOSIS builds.

03
Setting the standard

Someone will write the rules for verified AI records. We intend to hold the pen.

Flip ↻
The standard

Canada is standing up the machinery for responsible AI, from the Canadian AI Safety Institute to the Standards Council of Canada's AI and Data Governance Standardization Collaborative. GNOSIS is building to that bar and working with the Standards Council of Canada's standardization ecosystem to get the verification standard right: independent, sealed, human-signed, and checkable on anyone's equipment.

Tap a card to flip it

Cited: Prime Minister of Canada, June 4, 2026 · Canada's National AI Strategy: AI for All · Standards Council of Canada: AI and Data Governance Standardization Collaborative · gnosisethical.com →

GNOSIS · Less intelligence. More proof. · St. John's and Paradise, Newfoundland and Labrador
Get in touch

Talk to the team

Two quick picks and you're done. Tell us who you are and what you'd like, and it lands with our team already sorted. No forms to hunt through, no inbox scavenger hunt.

Pick both options above first.
Built in Paradise, Newfoundland and Labrador, for the people who carry the liability.
Legal

Privacy Policy

Effective July 3, 2026 · This policy explains what this site does and does not collect. Short version: we collect as little as possible, we do not track you, and the demo uses simulated data only.

Try it live

Two live trials. Both sealed.

Pick a surface. Each one runs live and opens with the access code you were given.

Legal

Terms and Conditions

Effective July 3, 2026 · Five x Five is a product of GNOSIS, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. By accessing this site, the demo, the trial, or any related materials, you agree to these terms.

Legal

Cookie Policy

Effective July 5, 2026 · Five x Five uses only essential cookies. No tracking, no advertising, no third parties.

Security & Trust

Security and Trust

How Five x Five protects the record, written so a security or privacy reviewer can map each item to a control framework.

Legal

Accessibility

We want Five x Five to be usable by everyone, including clinicians and staff who rely on assistive technology.

Backing & partners

Five x Five is built with the people and institutions whose job is to make sure it holds up.

Bounce Health Innovation
Backing GNOSIS Ethical Health’s growth through its health-innovation incubator in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Memorial University of Newfoundland
Community and research partner, through the Centre for Social Entrepreneurship and graduate studies.
Cenovus
Commercialization partner at Memorial’s Faculty of Business, the Cenovus Centre of Excellence.
Amazon Web Services
Hosts GNOSIS in Canada (ca-central-1), so the data never leaves the country.
NLOWE Member 2026/2027
Proud member of NLOWE, the Newfoundland and Labrador Organization of Women Entrepreneurs (2026/2027).