Every claim we hold, and how far we can stand behind it.
142 claims across 39 products. 28% are confirmed against the source text by the evidence gate; 39% come from a class with no vendor interest. Everything below is browsable, filterable, and available as JSON.
| Evidence class | Claims | Confirmed | What it can support |
|---|---|---|---|
| Peer-reviewed study | 19 | 5 | Reviewed before publication; assess study quality, funding, conflicts, and relevance to your setting. |
| Regulatory filing | 4 | 0 | A statement made to a regulator, where being wrong has consequences. |
| Independent report | 32 | 9 | Reporting outside a vendor publication; assess underlying data, sponsorship, and conflicts separately. |
| Customer case | 4 | 3 | A real deployment, but selected and framed by someone with an interest. |
| Press release | 63 | 22 | The vendor's own announcement. Useful for dates and facts, not for outcomes. |
| Vendor page | 20 | 1 | Marketing copy. Establishes what is claimed, never that it is true. |
Showing 2 of 2 matching claims (142 in the full corpus) · 0% of this selection is confirmed · clear filters
Applied Clinical Informatics (2026): early implementation of DAX Copilot in a pediatric hematology-oncology division across 11,544 outpatient encounters (Jan-Jul 2025) found that for encounters of 40 minutes or less, median documentation time was 11 minutes with DAX versus 24 minutes without - an approximately 30% lower documentation time (95% CI 19.9-38.4%; p<0.001).
Provenance
- Claim ID
- clm_61a71bb995cf683609ed
- Version
- 1
- Workflow
- Ambient Clinical Documentation
- Dimension
- evidence strength
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-27
- Reviewer
- healthit-gate-v1
- Source URL
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC13192280/
Blinded PDQI-9 evaluation (Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 2025) of 97 clinical encounters across five specialties compared LLM-generated ambient notes from Suki's production system against physician-authored Gold notes: overall quality scores were comparable (4.20/5 ambient vs 4.25/5 gold, p = 0.04), ambient notes scored higher on thoroughness (4.22 vs 3.80, p < 0.001) and organization (p = 0.03), and reviewers overall preferred ambient notes 47% vs 39%, though hallucinations were detected in 31% of ambient vs 20% of gold notes (p = 0.01).
Provenance
- Claim ID
- clm_93f1e478d301f2abd57c
- Version
- 1
- Workflow
- Ambient Clinical Documentation
- Dimension
- evidence strength
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-27
- Reviewer
- healthit-gate-v1
- Source URL
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12586549/