I built an AI tool that explains prescriptions & lab reports in simple language
Built dawaai.info 🚀 — an AI tool that explains prescriptions & lab reports in simple language.
Upload your report → get clear explanations, side effects & usage.
Goal: make healthcare easier to understand.
Would love feedback 🙏
https://www.dawaai.info
Trending on Indie Hackers
I checked it and this is very fast in response. That's very well designed and engineered.
Thanks a lot, really appreciate that!
Speed was something I focused on quite a bit, so glad it’s noticeable. Still improving things on the UX and clarity side — but this means a lot 🙌
This is a genuinely high-value use case — medical jargon is one of the biggest sources of patient anxiety. How are you handling the accuracy / liability piece? That seems like the main adoption blocker in the healthcare space.
Yeah, that’s something I’m being quite careful about.
On the accuracy side, I’ve structured the AI prompts to strictly generate responses based on trusted medical guidelines (like WHO and other standard medical sources), and to avoid giving anything beyond what’s well-established.
Along with that, I’m keeping the output more explainability-focused rather than prescriptive, so it helps users understand reports instead of making decisions for them. Still continuously improving this layer as it’s definitely the most critical part.
I think this is a growing space. Better and faster access to insights is critical. My fiancee works in healthtech and is very passionate about this.
One piece of contstructive advice - website says a lot of cool stuff but as a cold lead coming on your site, where do I see the value prop vs using my own Claude for insights? A short demo or something like that could help :)
Thanks for the thoughtful feedback — this makes a lot of sense.
You’re right, the differentiation vs general AI tools like Claude isn’t as clear as it should be for a first-time visitor. I’ll work on making the value prop more obvious and add a short demo so people can immediately see the output and use case.
Really appreciate you pointing this out — I’ll apply this on the website.
Have you had any traction yet or still validating?
Yeah, we’re getting around ~300 users daily at the moment, but most of them are still in the free/anonymous usage stage — they’re not really signing up or logging in yet.
Right now I’m more focused on validating usage patterns and improving the core experience. Once engagement stabilizes, I’ll work on tightening the login + retention loop.
This is a solid use case — especially in healthcare where clarity = trust.
One thing I’d flag though: before users even try it, they judge credibility based on the name + domain.
Something like .info can actually create friction here.
Curious — are you planning to upgrade the brand/domain as this grows, or keeping this for now?
That’s a very fair point—especially in healthcare where trust is everything. Since we’re primarily focused on sharing information (not a commercial service at this stage), we chose a .info domain as a starting point. That said, we do recognize how perception plays a role, and upgrading the brand/domain is definitely on the roadmap as we grow. Really appreciate you calling this out.
Makes sense — good call starting simple.
The only reason I brought it up is because in healthcare, the shift from “interesting tool” → “trusted product” often happens earlier than expected.
Even a small upgrade in name/domain can noticeably improve:
– first-time conversion
– willingness to upload sensitive reports
– perceived reliability
Not urgent of course, but worth locking in early before users start associating with the current one.
If you ever explore options, happy to share a few directions that would fit this space well.
Yeah makes sense, and I agree with your point đź‘Ť
Right now though, I’m already seeing decent willingness from users to upload sensitive reports + good perceived reliability on the current setup. Also, I’ve just added some new features like a Health Score, which is helping strengthen that trust layer even more.
Not urgent from my side at the moment, but I do get the long-term value of improving name/domain early. Happy to explore directions with you when I start thinking along those lines.
You’re right — if users are already uploading reports, that’s a strong signal.
The only thing I’d push back on slightly is when the trust layer compounds.
In healthcare, perception doesn’t scale linearly — it flips.
At small volume:
people judge based on function (“does it work?”)
At higher volume:
people judge based on signal (“does this feel safe enough to rely on?”)
That shift usually happens earlier than founders expect — especially once you move beyond early adopters.
What I’ve seen:
products that delay tightening brand/domain end up paying for it later (lower conversion on cold traffic, more hesitation from new users)
So it’s less about urgency, more about:
locking a foundation before perception becomes hard to change.
Curious — are you planning to keep this more informational long-term, or evolve into something people rely on regularly?
Got your point — makes sense.
Right now the way I’m thinking about it is:
For a normal user, it’s more of an informational tool — something they use as per need, not daily. But for someone like a doctor or a medical receptionist, this could actually become a regular-use workflow tool.
So I see two layers here:
I agree with what you said about trust compounding early — especially if we want to expand beyond early adopters. So it probably makes sense to start strengthening the trust layer (branding, positioning, clarity) sooner rather than later, even if usage is currently more functional.
If you have specific suggestions on what you’d prioritize improving in that direction, I’m open to adding those in.
Right now dawaai.info works, but it still feels like an informational tool, not something people rely on.
If you’re moving toward clinics + repeat usage, the brand needs to signal:
“this is safe to trust with real decisions.”
In healthcare, that shift happens fast — and mostly from:
name + domain + how serious it feels.
That’s what drives:
higher cold conversion
more willingness to rely on it
stronger perceived authority
You’re already getting usage — this is about compounding it early before perception locks in.
If you want, I can share a few naming directions depending on whether you lean more:
patient-facing
or clinic/workflow
Easier to show than explain.
This is a really interesting idea — especially the “explain in simple language” part. I feel like a lot of people struggle with exactly that after getting prescriptions or lab results.
One thing that came to mind: in products like this, trust is probably everything. If it’s not immediately clear why the explanation is reliable, users might hesitate to rely on it — even if the output is good.
Also curious how you’re thinking about the first-time experience. Like, when someone lands — is it obvious what they should do first? (ask a question vs upload vs something else)
Happy to take a deeper look and share more detailed UX feedback if that’s useful.
This is super insightful—appreciate you taking the time.
100% agree that trust is the core challenge here. We’re actively working on making reliability more explicit (not just good outputs, but visible reasoning + guardrails).
On onboarding—great call. It’s something we’re iterating on right now to reduce friction and make the first step obvious.
Would love your deeper UX feedback—I'll reach out / feel free to dive in and share anything you notice.
Took a closer look at the medicine checker page — sharing a few specific UX thoughts:
Readability on the first screen
Some text feels a bit hard to scan quickly (contrast + density).
For a health-related tool, clarity in the first seconds feels especially important.
First action isn’t obvious enough
There are multiple things I can do (ask, upload, explore examples), but no single clear starting point.
Might help to make one primary action dominant.
Trust is present but not visible early
I noticed the disclaimer, but it reads more like a legal note.
I think what could really help is showing:
– how the AI generates answers
– what it's based on
– where its limits are closer to the input area.
Output expectation
Before trying it, I’m not fully sure what kind of result I’ll get.
A small preview example could reduce friction a lot.
Overall, the idea is strong — especially simplifying medical info.
Feels like improving clarity + trust in the first few seconds could significantly increase usage.
Thanks for sharing this — really helpful breakdown.
I can see what you mean around first-screen clarity, making the primary action more obvious, and especially surfacing trust signals earlier instead of it feeling like just a disclaimer. The point about setting output expectations with a quick preview also makes a lot of sense.
I’ll start applying these suggestions and refining the experience accordingly. Appreciate you taking the time to go this deep into it 🙌
Makes sense — sounds like you're focusing on the right areas.
If you end up iterating on the first screen / onboarding, I’d be happy to take another quick look — sometimes a second pass after changes reveals different friction points.
Either way, excited to see how this evolves — it’s a really strong use case.
That sounds great, thanks! I’ve just pushed the updates to the Home page incorporating your feedback, including adding the medical disclaimer.
If you have some time to take another look, I’d really appreciate your guidance. Let me know if these changes address those friction points or if you spot anything else that needs a tweak!
Happy to dive deeper into how it works — AI, tech stack (Python + AI APIs), or any challenges I ran into while building it. Ask me anything 👇