Physician — Clinical Logic & Evidence
Gut Window · Full-time · In-office
The role in one line
Given a symptom, build the verified clinical logic that gets a person to the likely condition — and carry it through evidence checking, specialist review, and sign-off.
This is not a writing job. Drafting is handled separately. You own the reasoning and the evidence behind it.
Why internal medicine specifically
Most health content is built from the condition backwards: someone already knows they have colitis, and reads about colitis. Real people arrive the other way round — with a symptom, no diagnosis, and no idea which specialist they need.
That undifferentiated space is internal medicine's discipline. We need clinicians who think in differentials, pre-test probability, discriminating features and red flags — across systems, not within a single organ.
It also fits where we are expanding. Digestive symptoms connect outward: to skin, joints, mood, oral health, metabolism. Mapping those honestly requires someone comfortable across systems and disciplined about where the evidence stops.
The work, stage by stage
1. Draw the logic map
The core artifact. For a presenting symptom, produce a structured map covering:
- The differential — ordered by actual prevalence in our readership, not by severity
- Discriminating features that separate one branch from another
- The history questions that genuinely shift probability, and which are noise
- Red flags and escalation thresholds — what warrants urgent or same-day care
- Routing for each branch: self-manage, see a GP, see a specialist, go now
- Boundaries of certainty — where the evidence thins out and honest answer is "we don't know"
2. Verify every node
Each claim carries a source: guideline, primary literature, or standard reference. Where sources conflict, you adjudicate and record why. This is the step that makes a map defensible rather than merely plausible, and it is a large share of the job.
3. Check drafting fidelity
The verified map is turned into prose. You read the draft against your own map and confirm nothing has been softened, reordered, or over-hedged — particularly red flags. Nothing proceeds without this check.
4. Manage specialist review
Package the piece for the relevant external reviewer, brief them on what to scrutinise, and handle the exchange.
5. Incorporate and sign off
Integrate review feedback, adjudicate where a reviewer and the general literature disagree, log the reasoning, and release for publishing. Your byline attaches.
The standard
Probability-ordered, not fear-ordered. Most health content leads with the cancer. We lead with what it usually is, and handle serious possibilities without theatre.
Red flags are never buried or softened. The part of this work with real consequences.
Uncertainty is stated, not smoothed. "The evidence is limited" is a publishable conclusion here.
Every claim is testable before it publishes. If it cannot be sourced, it does not go up — including claims we would prefer to keep.
Maps are assets, not one-offs. They are versioned, reusable, and updated as evidence changes. One good map supports many pages.
What you will not do
- No patient consultation, diagnosis, or individual medical advice
- No doctor–patient relationship is created by this work
- No responding to reader queries about their own health
- No product endorsement — we do not sell health products, and you will never be asked to build logic around a commercial claim
- No prose production. If you want a writing job, this is not it.
Requirements
Essential
- MBBS with MD (General Medicine / Internal Medicine), or equivalent
- Current, verifiable registration (NMC or state medical council)
- Post-registration clinical experience with genuinely undifferentiated presentations — OPD, emergency, or general medicine
- Strong critical appraisal skills. You will spend a large share of your time in the literature, distinguishing association from causation, guideline-backed from preliminary, and well-powered from underpowered
- Structured, explicit thinking. You must be able to externalise clinical reasoning that most doctors carry implicitly
- Willing to publish under your own name, with qualifications and registration number
- Willing to disclose any pharmaceutical, device, or diagnostic-industry relationships, which we publish
Valued
- Research, publication, or teaching experience
- Familiarity with clinical guidelines and their limitations
- Interest in gastroenterology, or in systemic links between the gut and other systems
Not required
- Polished writing. Clear thinking, yes — prose craft, no.
- SEO or content-marketing experience.
How the team works
Two physicians in-house. You will be one of them, so scope and ownership are large from day one.
External specialists — practising authors of national diagnostic guidelines — review the output. You brief them and adjudicate their feedback; you are not subordinate to them.
Drafting, publishing, and distribution sit outside the clinical function. Your time goes to reasoning and evidence, which is the scarce input.
What we are honest about
Leaving full-time clinical practice is a real decision. We support one protected clinical session per week elsewhere — we would rather you stay clinically current than slowly drift.
Much of this work is desk work. Reading, sourcing, adjudicating, structuring. If the appeal of medicine for you is patient contact, this will not substitute for it.
Peer perception varies. Some colleagues will see this as clinical reasoning applied at population scale. Others will see it as leaving medicine.
The reach is different in kind. A busy OPD sees a few thousand people a year. A well-ranked symptom page can reach that many in a week — which is exactly why the accuracy bar is higher here, not lower.
This is a young operation. The maps do not exist yet. You would be building the method, not inheriting it.
Terms
- Full-time, in-office, [location]
- Salary benchmarked against clinical compensation, discussed openly at first conversation
- Protected weekly clinical session supported
- One of two clinical hires; direct ownership of the method
Growth
The first hires define the mapping method itself — the template, the sourcing standard, the house rules for describing uncertainty. That method is the organisation's core asset, and its authors lead the function as it grows.
Research collaboration is open to anyone who wants it: we hold original datasets that exist nowhere else, and co-authorship on peer-reviewed work built from them is available.
About Gut Window
An independent, evidence-first health publication focused on digestive health and its connections to the rest of the body. We exist because the space between "something is wrong with me" and "here is what it might be" is served badly — by content farms, by marketing, and by advice that sounds more certain than the evidence allows.
We would rather publish "we don't know" than a confident answer we cannot support.
To apply
Send:
- CV and registration number
- A note on your clinical experience with undifferentiated presentations
- Any industry relationships to disclose
- The exercise below
Exercise. Take the symptom "bloating after eating." Sketch the logic map as you would build it: the differential in likely order for an adult general population, what discriminates the main branches from each other, the two or three questions that most change your thinking, and what would make you send someone for urgent assessment. Name the sources you would verify each part against.
Structure over polish. Bullet points are fine. We are reading for clinical reasoning, honesty about uncertainty, and whether you can make implicit thinking explicit.
[contact email]
Offers subject to legal review. Nothing in this document constitutes an offer of employment.
Pay: ₹40,000.00 - ₹50,000.00 per hour
Work Location: In person
