What are the clinical records of a doctor admissible for the purposes of medical malpractice?

Those purposes were explained by Justice Metzger in Seaman v. Crook, 2003 BCSC 464 at paras. 14 - 15. In summary, a doctor’s observations and prescribed treatments are facts and admissible as such without further proof; diagnoses made by a doctor, statements made by a patient, and diagnoses made by a person to whom a doctor has referred the patient are admissible for the fact they were made, but not their truth; and any statement by a patient or a third party that is not within the observation of a doctor or person who, in the ordinary course of business, has a duty to record those statements, is not admissible for any purpose. Finally, opinions contained in clinical records are not admissible for their truth; they are admissible only for the fact that they were reached at the time.