What can we actually deploy without an integration project we cannot staff?
Independent and group practices, 1–50 clinicians, usually without a dedicated IT team.
What we can answer for you
- Documented EHR integrations and whether they are marketplace-listed or bespoke.
- Deployment model — SaaS, EHR-embedded, or on-premise — and what that implies for your setup.
- Whether a vendor publishes any pricing signal at all, and where it is silent.
- Which products have evidence from ambulatory and small-practice settings rather than academic centres only.
What we will not tell you
- We do not publish negotiated prices, and we band contract values rather than reporting exact figures.
- We cannot tell you a total cost of ownership. Implementation effort is rarely disclosed publicly.
The Operations lens — Adoption friction, measurable throughput, workflow fit. This reorders the same dimensions every audience sees. It never creates a separate score.
- 1deployment traction30%
- 2economic value30%
- 3interoperability20%
- 4evidence strength15%
- 5trust governance5%
3 of 39 products currently pass the documentary gate. 40 of 142 claims are source-checked. This is not an audience-specific recommendation. The gate is one global evidence test — it does not change by role, and neither does this list. What the lens above changes is which dimensions we weight when you read a record.
What a product must clear to appear here
- Every claim resolves to a live source that the gate re-fetches, with the class and date recorded.
- Median evidence age is inside the freshness bar — Current (≤45d) or Aging (46–120d). Historical evidence cannot carry a decision.
- The product maps to an evaluated buying scenario, so it has peers to be compared against.
- No critical dimension is left entirely unevidenced.
Almost all 36 exclusions are staleness, not product quality. Every excluded product keeps a full profile and states its own reason.
See all 39 products, including the excluded → · Exclusion reasons, broken down →