Clinician Companion App — Remote Patient Review
The other half of the system: the doctor’s screen.
Published anonymously at the client’s request
Overview
The clinician-facing counterpart to the patient vitals app. It reads the same Cloud Firestore collections from a different device, presents patient readings as dated, charted history, and is built as a separate application so a clinician never installs a patient’s app.
What this proves
That we design across devices, not just screens. Two audiences, two binaries, one shared data contract.
Key features
A separate binary for a separate audience
Rather than gate one app behind a role switch, the clinician gets their own application with its own entry point, welcome flow and navigation. Nothing about the patient experience is shipped to the doctor’s device, and vice versa.
Dated, charted patient history
Readings are read back from Firestore and rendered as charts with localised date and time formatting, so the clinician reviews a trend across sessions rather than a single live number.
Read-only by design
The clinician app never pairs with hardware. It consumes what the patient device produced, which keeps the sensor pipeline in exactly one place and makes the failure modes easy to reason about.
The architecture decision
One application with a role toggle would have been less code. Two applications was the better call: a clinician and a patient have almost no screens in common, the update cadences differ, and shipping a patient-facing pairing flow onto a doctor’s phone is a support burden with no upside. Firestore is the contract between them.
It is the smaller of the two applications by some margin, and deliberately so — its job is to read clearly, not to do much.
Not demonstrated by this project
Stated plainly, because a portfolio is more useful when it is precise about its limits.
- No authentication or per-clinician access control
- No automated tests
- No alerting or thresholds — it displays, it does not warn
- No clinical validation or regulatory work of any kind
- English only, single-file, no offline handling
Portfolio assessment
- Visual design
- 5.0 / 10
- Technical complexity
- 5.0 / 10
- Interactivity
- 4.0 / 10
- Business value
- 6.0 / 10
- Portfolio appeal
- 5.0 / 10