Doximity Scribe vs Freed
The two products an individual clinician actually chooses between, and the price gap is total: one is free and the other starts at 39 dollars a month. Doximity gives Scribe away to every verified United States clinician and student, covers all users under a business associate agreement, stores no audio and names the third party that processes the encounter, which is a stronger data position than most paid products here manage. What it does not do is reach the record system: no integration with any electronic health record was located, so the note comes back to the clinician and stops there. Freed costs money and pushes the note into any browser based record with one click, publishes SOC 2 Type 1 and Type 2 as independent audits, and includes a business associate agreement on every tier. If the note has to land in the chart, that is worth 39 dollars. If it does not, free is hard to argue with.
- It costs nothing and the eligibility is stated precisely: free to all verified United States physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants and medical students, with no tiers and no per note limit.
- Every user is covered by a business associate agreement, which removes the question that gates almost every other free or entry tier product in this category.
- The data commitment is unhedged: no audio is stored or retained, recordings are processed in real time and discarded once the note is generated, and the vendor names the third party that processes the encounter.
- It puts the note in the chart. Freed's EHR push moves the note into any browser based record system in one click, where the alternative has no located integration with any record system at all.
- Paid tiers with defined limits and a coding tier, so a practice can scale from a single clinician to a group with volume discounts rather than depending on a free product's roadmap.
- A security disclosure that is unusually specific for a self serve product: SOC 2 Type 1 and Type 2 as independent audits, federal standard cryptographic modules, and all data processed and stored in United States data centres.
Side by Side
| Axis | D Doximity Scribe |
F Freed |
|---|---|---|
| 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 |
Related comparisons
Other published head to head assessments involving these vendors or their closest peers. The full set for this category is on the Ambient Scribes page.
Doximity Scribe describes no review gate, sign off step, confidence threshold, acceptance rate or edit burden figure in its published material, which is the notable gap in an otherwise strong record, and it publishes no accuracy figure or bias and accent position despite reaching a very large share of United States clinicians.
Freed states that its models are trained only on de identified notes, which means customer content does train the model after de identification, a different commitment from not training on customer data at all. Freed's specialty fit is strongest in primary care and third party review reports more editing needed in procedure heavy and subspecialty work. Neither vendor publishes an accuracy figure.