Sample report

You hand over a dated record instead of trying to remember. The appointment starts from what actually happened over three months, not from how you’re feeling in the room that morning, and you don’t have to be your own witness for it. Everything else symetric does, the check-ins, the domains you picked, the quiet weeks, exists to build towards that.

This sample is built from three months of made-up data, not a real person’s, so you can see exactly what the report looks like and decide if it’s worth your time before you install anything. Download it directly. No email address, no account, no sign-up.

What’s in it

The report is landscape, and its length depends on what you track: a chart page for every few domains, and the body pages only if body tracking is on. The sections always come in this order.

Executive summary. How many check-ins, over what date range, and the patterns detected in that window, each labelled by how much evidence it rests on, along with anything you flagged to bring up with a clinician.

Domain summary. Every domain you tracked, mind and body, read against your own baseline rather than a population average.

Mind overview and charts. What stood out across the mind domains, a timeline of events and interventions, therapy starts, referrals, medication changes, laid over the same weeks so a shift and its likely cause sit side by side, then a chart for each domain against your baseline.

Sleep. Sleep quality and hours slept across the period, and what tends to follow a poor night.

Body overview and charts. Only if you track body. Notable events (a joint giving way, a migraine, a crash), where pain or instability showed up most, how things moved around a medication or therapy change, and the same chart treatment for each body domain. If you described what pain or breathlessness felt like, aching, burning, shooting, those words get a section of their own, because a score says how bad and only the words say what kind.

Context and connections. Time-of-day patterns, like symptoms that are consistently worse in the morning, and relationships between domains, like two things that rise and fall together. Every relationship here is a qualitative direction and a confidence tier, not a raw correlation coefficient, so it isn’t read with more authority than self-reported data warrants. If you log cycle Day 1, how things looked around it is here too.

Data quality and methodology. Week by week, how consistently you checked in, when the missed check-ins tend to fall, and how many check-ins were logged with the one-tap “nothing unusual” entry, so findings from a thin stretch are read with appropriate caution. Then a plain explanation of how baselines, patterns and thresholds are calculated.

What it isn’t

The report describes what you logged. It doesn’t diagnose anything, and it doesn’t tell you or your clinician what to do next. It’s a record, not a recommendation.