Behold.ai vs Gleamer

Last VerifiedAugust 4, 2026
Verdict

Two European radiograph companies separated by the most consequential decision in imaging AI, whether a human still looks. Behold auto reports chest films it classifies as high confidence normal, removing them from the worklist entirely, and it publishes the performance numbers that autonomy requires in peer reviewed venues. Gleamer detects fractures, effusions and dislocations on trauma radiographs with the reader deciding every case, and holds a clearance covering adult and paediatric use reported to be unique in that segment. They read different films, so a department would rarely choose between them. What the pair shows is the evidence gradient: the moment a product stops handing a study to a radiologist, the false negative rate at its operating threshold stops being interesting and becomes the only thing that matters.

Select Behold.ai if
  • It removes studies from the worklist entirely by auto reporting chest radiographs classified as high confidence normal, which is genuine autonomy inside a bounded task.
  • The numbers that matter for that autonomy are published in peer reviewed venues, and the confidence threshold is itself the governance mechanism.
  • For a service drowning in normal chest films, removing them from the queue is a different economic proposition from reading them faster.
Select Gleamer if
  • Its trauma radiography clearance covers adult and paediatric use, reported to be unique in that segment, with a strong clearance study design behind it.
  • The reader retains the decision on every study, which is the conventional and lower risk configuration.
  • Distribution through several imaging platforms means adoption does not depend on a single integration path.
Disclosure

The autonomy difference sets the evidence bar: an auto reporting classifier needs its false negative rate at the operating threshold published and locally revalidated, because a missed finding on an auto reported film is never seen by anyone, while a detection aid leaves the radiologist reading every study.

Behold's regulatory standing is multi jurisdictional and unsettled and its corporate history complicates the identity of the contracting entity, both of which should be established before deployment. Neither publishes a security attestation or pricing.

AI Health Index

An independent reference for evaluating AI vendors in healthcare. No vendor pays for inclusion, placement, or rating.

Index Status
Last index update
July 31, 2026
The AI Health Index is an editorial reference, not a regulatory body. Vendor data is verified against published sources and public regulatory filings. Figures labeled “Estimated” have not been confirmed by the vendor. See the Methodology page for evaluation standards and limitations.
© 2026 AI Health Index
3801 N Capital of Texas Hwy, Ste E240 · Austin, TX 78746