When is CLEW Medical the better choice?

It publishes the actual operating characteristics of its models in a public regulatory document, which almost nothing else in this category does, so sensitivity and specificity are readable rather than asserted. The cleared indications carry an explicit adjunctive constraint stating predictions are for reference only, which bounds what the hospital may build on top of them. It produced the first direct measurement of this category's defining failure mode, comparing model output against what clinicians actually did, published in a peer reviewed journal.

When is Etiometry the better choice?

Four separately cleared physiologic risk indices with population specific indications, which is the deepest regulatory footprint in this category, plus a vendor neutral data layer underneath them. The best security disclosure in the category by a wide margin, publishing SOC 2 Type II with the type named, against a competitor with no located attestation. It publishes the shape of an actual implementation, including hospital installed virtual servers, which is information most vendors reserve for the sales process.

CLEW Medical vs Etiometry

Last VerifiedAugust 4, 2026

Verdict

Two regulated approaches to critical care risk, and between them they hold the best transparency in this category. CLEW publishes the operating characteristics of its cleared models in a public regulatory document, which means a buyer can read the sensitivity and specificity rather than take them on trust, and it produced the first published measurement of whether clinicians acted on the predictions at all. Etiometry runs four separately cleared physiologic risk indices over a vendor neutral intensive care data layer, publishes SOC 2 Type II with the type named, and describes the implementation shape down to the servers. The technical approaches differ enough that accuracy comparison is misleading: one is machine learning classification, the other is physiologic modelling. Both are explicitly adjunctive, so neither supports an automated response pathway without stepping outside its clearance.

Select CLEW Medical if

It publishes the actual operating characteristics of its models in a public regulatory document, which almost nothing else in this category does, so sensitivity and specificity are readable rather than asserted.
The cleared indications carry an explicit adjunctive constraint stating predictions are for reference only, which bounds what the hospital may build on top of them.
It produced the first direct measurement of this category's defining failure mode, comparing model output against what clinicians actually did, published in a peer reviewed journal.

Select Etiometry if

Four separately cleared physiologic risk indices with population specific indications, which is the deepest regulatory footprint in this category, plus a vendor neutral data layer underneath them.
The best security disclosure in the category by a wide margin, publishing SOC 2 Type II with the type named, against a competitor with no located attestation.
It publishes the shape of an actual implementation, including hospital installed virtual servers, which is information most vendors reserve for the sales process.

Attribute Matrix

Side by Side

Axis	C CLEW Medical	E Etiometry
AI Centrality
Autonomy and Oversight Model
Model and Technology Transparency
Clinical and Operational Evidence
AI Safety and PHI Stewardship
HIPAA and BAA Posture
Security Certifications and Trust Center
FDA and Regulatory Status
AI Governance and Bias Disclosure
EHR and Interoperability Depth
Deployment Model and Data Residency
Commercial Transparency
Setting and Specialty Coverage

Keep Comparing

Related comparisons

Other published head to head assessments involving these vendors or their closest peers. The full set for this category is on the Inpatient Deterioration & Risk Monitoring page.

Etiometry vs Sickbay→AgileMD vs Bayesian Health→AgileMD vs Epic Sepsis Model→AITRICS VitalCare vs Bayesian Health→AlertWatch:OB vs PeriGen→Bayesian Health vs Epic Sepsis Model→

Disclosure

Both products are regulated devices and both are explicitly adjunctive, meaning neither may be used as the sole basis for a therapeutic decision, and a hospital building an automated response pathway on top of either is operating outside the cleared indication. Etiometry's models are physiologic rather than learned classifiers, which is a different technical approach from the machine learning models that dominate this category and should not be compared on accuracy alone. CLEW publishes no security attestation, trust centre or business associate posture, and neither vendor publishes pricing or a unit of pricing such as per monitored bed.