314e Dexit

The model is the product. 314e built and named a proprietary extraction model, DextractLM, described as purpose built for healthcare documentation rather than adapted from a general purpose model, and the classification and extraction it performs is the entire value of Dexit. There is no underlying document repository, scanning estate or network that would retain worth without it. Note the distinction this record depends on: the parent company is substantially a services and consulting business, but Dexit is a separately licensable product built around its own model, which is why it clears the services test that this index has applied to reject vendors whose AI turns out to be a thin layer over human delivery.

Dexit automatically identifies a document's type and associates it with the correct patient and encounter, which is a consequential automatic action: a document filed to the wrong chart is both a record integrity failure and a potential patient safety event, and it is the kind of error that stays invisible until someone goes looking for a result that is not there. The company publishes accuracy figures but describes no oversight architecture around them. There is no stated confidence threshold, no exception queue behaviour, no description of what happens to the several percent of documents the model gets wrong, no human verification gate before filing, and no audit or reconciliation reporting offered back to the health information management team. Accuracy is not oversight, and a published rate without a described handling path for the residual is exactly the gap this axis measures.

Materially more disclosure than the other document intake products assessed here. 314e names its model, DextractLM, states that it is purpose built for healthcare rather than general purpose, states that Dexit runs on self hosted models rather than third party inference APIs, names the classification technique it calls a Fusion Strategy, and publishes precision figures for both extraction and classification. Naming the model and the hosting posture answers two questions most vendors in this shape leave open. Held at B because the disclosure stops at the names: there is no model card, no training data description, no test set, and Fusion Strategy is a product name rather than a described method, so an evaluator cannot assess how classification actually works or where it degrades.

Two specific accuracy figures are published, over 95 percent precision in entity extraction and 97 percent document classification accuracy, and publishing numbers at all puts 314e ahead of most competitors in this shape. But neither figure carries a derivation. No test set is described, no denominator or document count is given, no breakdown by document type or source quality is offered, and no independent or customer validation was located. This index's standing lesson from Pieces applies directly: a quantified error rate is only as good as its published derivation, and publishing a number invites the methodology question that never publishing one avoids. No named customer, reference site or case study was located, and the throughput claims of ten times faster than manual and up to three times efficiency have no stated baseline.

One substantive architectural answer, which is more than most of this shape offers. 314e states that Dexit uses purpose built, self hosted models. For a product ingesting complete clinical documents, self hosted inference means document content is not being sent to a third party model provider's API, which removes the largest and least visible exposure in generative document processing. That is the same class of answer that earned OmniMD credit elsewhere in this index for stating plainly that no patient data routes through third party consumer AI services. Not established: what retention applies to processed documents and extracted entities, whether customer documents are used to further train or tune DextractLM, and whether self hosted means hosted in the customer's environment or in 314e's.

No statement of HIPAA compliance posture, business associate agreement availability or terms was located in public materials for Dexit. 314e sells to United States hospitals and health systems, so a BAA is a practical necessity and almost certainly exists, but nothing publicly verifiable was found and this axis grades what is disclosed.

No SOC 2, HITRUST, ISO 27001 or equivalent attestation, and no trust centre, security page or report request path specific to Dexit, was located. Not Rated reflects an absence of public evidence rather than an assessment of the underlying posture.

No device authorisation and none apparently required, since document classification and filing are administrative rather than clinical determinations. One point worth recording without overstating it: associating a document with the wrong patient record is a record integrity failure with clinical consequences, and health information management is a regulated function subject to record accuracy obligations under HIPAA and to accreditation standards, so the relevant compliance surface here is records governance rather than device regulation. No position on it is published.

No fairness, subgroup, error distribution or performance variation disclosure was located. The exposure in document processing is technical rather than demographic and it is unreported here as it is across this shape: classification and extraction accuracy vary with scan quality, handwriting, form layout and the sending organisation's equipment, so documents arriving from smaller, older or under resourced practices may be processed systematically worse than those from large well equipped senders. A single aggregate accuracy figure conceals exactly that distribution. No per source quality reporting, error distribution or exception analytics is described.

Described as integrating with multiple platforms and data sources, with no specific electronic health record named for Dexit anywhere located, no integration method described and no reference deployment cited. The parent company has substantial EHR consulting and integration expertise and sells adjacent interoperability products including a FHIR native archive, which makes the capability plausible, but capability at company level is not the same as a documented integration for this product and this axis grades the latter.

Better disclosed than most of this shape because the company states a hosting posture rather than leaving it implicit: Dexit runs on self hosted models. For an organisation with data residency obligations or a policy against sending clinical documents to external inference services, that is the material fact and it is stated up front. The remaining ambiguity is what self hosted means in practice, specifically whether models run inside the customer's own environment or inside 314e's infrastructure, and no region, tenancy model or residency commitment is published either way.

No price, tier or pricing unit is published. The company directs prospects to a product page to sign up, which implies a more self serve motion than the enterprise demo gate common in this category, but no rate appears in public materials. The unit question matters for document processing more than for seat based products: per document, per page, per user and per facility produce very different economics for an organisation handling high inbound volume, and nothing indicates which applies.

Scoped to hospital and health system health information management, addressing the 50 to 500 document types a health system handles. Breadth of document type is claimed but breadth of deployment is not evidenced: no named customer, no setting specific reference and no specialty capability is described, and there is no ambulatory, specialty or international coverage claim. The scope is coherent and narrow, and the absence of any named reference site is the limiting factor rather than the scope itself.