OrbDoc

Ambient capture and structured documentation are the whole product. The speech layer is licensed rather than built, running on Deepgram's Medical Nova 3, with Google Cloud AI and the vendor's own medical algorithms above it, which is the same shape as Sayvant building on Azure OpenAI and does not displace the model as the artifact. Naming the dependency rather than obscuring it is what separates this from the licensed whole product cases graded C.

The review gate is stated plainly and consistently across materials: all notes are presented for provider review before EHR submission, and the vendor describes the only change to workflow as a quick review step before finalising. Approval precedes the write rather than following it, which is the safer of the two orderings this index tracks. The audit trail supports it by recording when notes were created or modified and by whom. Held at B because no acceptance rate, edit burden figure or confidence threshold is published.

The most specific supply chain disclosure located in this wave. OrbDoc names its speech model, Deepgram Medical Nova 3, its cloud AI layer, Google Cloud, and acknowledges its own proprietary algorithms on top, which is the third answer in 65 records to the question of whose model is running and by far the most precise. It also names HL7 FHIR as its interoperability standard rather than claiming integration generically, and its audit trail records which AI models were used for each documentation action, so model provenance is reconstructable after the fact. Held at B because no accuracy figure, model card, error rate or evaluation methodology was located.

Better structured than most vendor claims and still anonymous. A cardiology group case study reports 45 minutes of daily time saved per provider, a 23 percent improvement in RVU productivity, and physician satisfaction rising from a 2.8 baseline to 4.2 out of 5 after six months, and quoting a BASELINE and a follow up interval is methodologically ahead of the bare percentages typical here. A telehealth deployment across 35 states with more than 800 contracted providers is also described. But no customer is named, no third party verified any of it, and no study or controlled evaluation exists, so this is well presented vendor reporting rather than evidence.

One of the most complete data positions in this index, and one element is close to unique. Audio is processed in real time and IMMEDIATELY DELETED after transcription with no persistent storage. Data is end to end encrypted in transmission and held in Google Cloud HIPAA compliant infrastructure. Business associate agreement coverage is described as full, and security audits and compliance reviews are described as regular. Most notably, TEXT NOTES ARE RETAINED ACCORDING TO THE CUSTOMER ORGANISATION'S OWN RETENTION POLICY rather than the vendor's, which puts the decision where the legal obligation already sits and is the exact inverse of vendors that gate retention control behind an enterprise tier. Held short of unimpeachable by the absence of an explicit statement that customer content is never used to train models, the same gap noted for Lyrebird.

At the top of B. Full business associate agreement coverage is stated rather than offered on request, alongside regular compliance reviews, and the Gulf offering claims alignment with JCI and CBAHI standards for that market. Held at B rather than A because the agreement terms are not published for inspection before contracting; Doximity holds the A on this axis because coverage there is automatic and universal with no separate step at all.

Two claims that need separating. Data is stored in Google Cloud HIPAA compliant infrastructure, which certifies the platform OrbDoc runs on rather than OrbDoc's own controls, the same attributed certification pattern this index tracks for RXNT and CareCortex. Regular security audits and compliance reviews are described as process rather than as a named, dated report. JCI and CBAHI are healthcare facility accreditation standards rather than software attestations, so compliance with them is doing loose work in a software context. No SOC 2, ISO 27001 or equivalent naming OrbDoc itself was located.

Not a regulated medical device and none claimed or required for ambient documentation.

Graded up on a mechanism rather than a policy document. The audit trail records WHICH AI MODELS WERE USED for each documentation action alongside who accessed what and when, which means a health system can reconstruct after the fact what produced a given note and on which model version. That is model provenance at the record level and it is the single most useful governance artifact found in this wave, because every other vendor's audit story stops at user actions. Separately the vendor states its diarisation is trained on diverse accents and speech patterns common in healthcare settings, an affirmative claim on the failure mode this index tracks across speech products. Held at B because the accent claim is asserted rather than demonstrated, no subgroup or fairness data is published, and the RVU productivity framing in its case study is revenue adjacent even though it is presented as productivity rather than coding intensity.

Named, standards based and genuinely bidirectional, with one capability almost nothing else here offers. Integration runs over secure APIs on HL7 FHIR with bidirectional exchange across clinical, administrative and revenue cycle modules, named for Allscripts Sunrise Acute Care, TouchWorks, Professional and Veradigm, and supporting BOTH cloud hosted AND ON PREMISE deployments, which most cloud scribes simply cannot serve. Output is formatted to match the destination system's field requirements rather than pasted. Telehealth coverage is equally concrete, capturing the audio stream directly from Zoom for Healthcare, Microsoft Teams for Healthcare, Doxy.me and proprietary platforms without a separate recording setup.

More specific than most. The hosting platform is named as Google Cloud HIPAA compliant infrastructure, audio is not persisted at all, and the product supports teams with mixed connectivity and different EHR setups including on premise record systems. A Gulf regional offering implies regional deployment for that market. Held at B because no explicit residency commitment, region list or sub processor detail was located, and for a vendor operating across the United States and the Gulf that question is concrete rather than theoretical.

A free trial is offered and promoted prominently, and a rural hospital testimonial describes the product as advanced documentation at an accessible cost, but no rate card, tier structure or per provider figure was located for any market. For a vendor selling simultaneously to integrated delivery networks and to rural single site hospitals, the absence of any published anchor is a larger gap than usual.

Wide across settings and, uniquely in this index, across regions. Coverage spans emergency departments, inpatient services, ambulatory clinics, cardiology, paediatrics, family medicine and mental health, sold to integrated delivery networks and academic medical centres at one end and to rural hospitals, small practices and community care teams at the other, with cross device continuity so a note started on a phone during rounds is finished on a tablet at the nurses' station. The distinguishing element is geographic: a dedicated Gulf offering with NATIVE ARABIC support and alignment to JCI and CBAHI standards across Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain and Oman. No other vendor assessed in this wave serves the Middle East at all, and Arabic clinical documentation is a genuinely different problem from adding a language to a menu.