Dyania Health vs Triomics (2026)
The two best evidenced chart reasoning platforms in clinical trials, and they published different things. Dyania published its methods and real world evidence from a major academic health system where the platform screened across many hospitals, keeping the clinician in the loop inside the study itself and treating diversity as a measured endpoint rather than a claim. Triomics published validation in a recognised digital medicine journal, is oncology tuned, and traces every match back to the pathology and biomarker that produced it, delivered where the oncology team already works. For a cancer centre, Triomics fits the specialty more tightly. For a health system that will have to defend how patients were screened, Dyania has already published what that process looks like in practice.
- It published methods rather than claims, with peer reviewed real world evidence from a major academic health system where the platform screened across many hospitals.
- The clinician in the loop design was preserved inside the published study rather than described separately from it.
- Diversity was treated as a measured study endpoint rather than a marketing claim about equitable access.
- It is oncology tuned rather than disease agnostic, which matters because decisive eligibility detail usually sits in pathology and biomarker text.
- Peer reviewed validation in a recognised digital medicine journal is the strongest evidence position in the trials category.
- Every match traces back to the pathology, biomarker and note that produced it, and the output lands where the oncology team already works.
This comparison is published by AI Health Index, an independent research platform that compares healthcare AI vendors objectively. Dyania Health and Triomics are each graded against the same capability taxonomy, from each vendor's own public materials and the regulatory record, under the AI Health Index verification standard. No vendor pays for placement, and no vendor has reviewed this page. How this evidence is graded
Plain facts
| Fact | Dyania Health | Triomics |
|---|---|---|
| Primary category | Clinical Trials AI | Clinical Trials AI |
| Founded | 2019 | 2021 |
| Headquarters | Jersey City, New Jersey, United States | San Francisco, California |
| Website | dyaniahealth.com | triomics.com |
Side by Side
Each record in one paragraph
Written to be quoted whole. Each paragraph states what the AI Health Index verified about the vendor, with the caveats attached. Generated from this pair’s live capability grades, so it moves when a grade moves.
The AI Health Index awards Dyania Health its top capability grade on several axes, including AI Centrality, Autonomy and Oversight Model and Model and Technology Transparency. Set against Triomics, Dyania Health does not grade higher on any scored axis, though the two are level on several axes, including AI Centrality, Autonomy and Oversight Model and Model and Technology Transparency. Grades reflect evidence the AI Health Index could verify at the last review, so a low grade records disclosure the vendor has not published rather than a capability it has been shown to lack.
Source: AI Health Index, August 2026
The AI Health Index awards Triomics its top capability grade on several axes, including AI Centrality, Autonomy and Oversight Model and Model and Technology Transparency. Set against Dyania Health, Triomics grades higher on several axes, including Model Supply Chain Disclosure, AI Safety and PHI Stewardship and HIPAA and BAA Posture. Grades reflect evidence the AI Health Index could verify at the last review, so a low grade records disclosure the vendor has not published rather than a capability it has been shown to lack.
Source: AI Health Index, August 2026
Questions buyers ask
Should we choose Dyania Health or Triomics?
The AI Health Index grades Triomics higher than Dyania Health on every axis that separates them, several axes, including Model Supply Chain Disclosure, AI Safety and PHI Stewardship and HIPAA and BAA Posture. Dyania Health does not grade higher on any scored axis.
Where do Dyania Health and Triomics differ most?
The widest separation the AI Health Index records between Dyania Health and Triomics is on Model Supply Chain Disclosure, where Dyania Health grades C and Triomics grades B. That axis sits in the AI Capability group, so it should carry the most weight for a buyer whose binding constraint is how much of the work the model itself is trusted to do.
Where do Dyania Health and Triomics grade the same?
The AI Health Index grades Dyania Health and Triomics the same on several axes, including AI Centrality, Autonomy and Oversight Model and Model and Technology Transparency. Neither holds an advantage the index can evidence on those axes, so they should not carry weight in a selection between these two.
Related comparisons
Other published head to head assessments involving these vendors or their closest peers. The full set for this category is on the Clinical Decision Support page.
Both should be asked for the false negative rate on eligibility screening, which neither publishes and which is the only real measure of a matching system, since an eligible patient who never surfaced is invisible in every metric either reports. Both inherit documentation bias, so patients with thin or fragmented records match less often regardless of eligibility. Neither publishes a security attestation or trust centre, and neither publishes pricing.