Videra Health pricing

Cost is absent from every published surface: no pricing page, unit of charge, range, implementation fee position, minimum commitment or pilot terms. Sales run through a demo booking form. Two fragments are the whole of what exists: an association discount that reveals an annual subscription basis, and one free screening tool.

Videra Health full profile Videra Health alternatives

Pricing terms

How Videra Health pricing works

Pricing model: Annual software subscription, established indirectly rather than stated. A professional association partnership offers members 20 percent off annual software subscription fees, which is the only disclosure anywhere that the basis is an annual subscription. No unit of charge is described. Whether the subscription is priced per clinician, per patient, per assessment, per facility or enterprise wide is unstated, as is whether the nine named products are licensed individually, bundled or tiered. TDScreen, the tardive dyskinesia screening tool, is free to any provider or patient, and that is the only product in the line carrying a stated price.
Implementation: Not disclosed. Videra publishes no implementation, integration or onboarding fee and no implementation timeline. Onboarding effort is nowhere costed despite being clearly non trivial: the platform integrates with named record systems spanning addiction treatment, behavioral health, senior living and the two major acute systems, and the company markets a connect once model that implies an integration project at the front. Ambient documentation and assessment write back into a clinical record are each their own build, and nothing indicates whether either is included, charged separately, or scoped per customer.
Business associate agreement: Not disclosed as a template or posture. What is published covers the surrounding regime in detail and is silent on the agreement itself. SOC 2 Type II is held and a public trust center is published, though the report itself is released to customers under a non disclosure agreement and the audit period is not stated. HIPAA compliance is claimed alongside SOC 2 under the heading of industry standard certifications, when only the first is externally attested. A redisclosure consent notice is published as a standing page, which indicates the separate federal confidentiality regime governing substance use disorder treatment records has been engaged rather than overlooked. No business associate agreement template, negotiation stance, execution requirement or subcontractor flow down position is published, and how substance use records are segregated in practice is not described.

The product structure makes the silence more costly than it would be for a single product. Nine separately named products span intake, multimodal assessment, ambient session documentation, clinician workflow support, documentation quality assurance, clinical trial observation, psychedelic trial observation, video screeners and co developed digital endpoints. Those carry entirely different cost drivers. Documentation scales with clinician headcount, assessment scales with patient volume, and trial observation is a study level engagement, so a twenty clinician outpatient group and a pharmaceutical sponsor running a post market study are consuming two different products. Nothing indicates whether that difference is priced, or whether assessment is priced per patient or per facility.

Nor is a return proxy supplied. The company argues two clinician hours saved per day, a 64 percent reduction in crisis driven interventions and 85 percent faster lead to care engagement. That is a financial argument with every one of its financial inputs withheld: no cost per clinician, no cost per assessment, and no reference customer figure a buyer could model against.

Buyer type compounds it. A residential behavioral health operator, a multi site outpatient group, a health system and a pharmaceutical sponsor are four different commercial conversations, and the life sciences line almost certainly prices on a study basis rather than a subscription, which nothing acknowledges.

Compared on price

Videra Health pricing against its alternatives

Published prices for Videra Health and the products closest to it. Each figure is as the vendor publishes it, in its own currency and billing unit.

All Videra Health alternatives →

V
Videra HealthNo published price
A
Aiberry$5,000/year (Digital MindCare, annual organizational license, no usage limits), with Smart AI MindCare and Custom Enterprise quoted
M
mdhubNot published. Sold through a demo. Three agents priced separately or together, basis undisclosed
C
Canary SpeechNo published price
W
WysaConsumer product free with paid premium tier, enterprise pricing not published
L
LyssnNo published price
C
CreyosNot recorded
N
Nextvisit AI$49 per month (Nextvisit Go, non prescribing providers, 100 notes), $199 per month (Provider+, prescribers, unlimited notes), Enterprise quoted
S
Spring HealthNo published price

Questions

Videra Health pricing, answered

How much does Videra Health cost?

Videra Health does not publish a price. Cost is absent from every published surface: no pricing page, unit of charge, range, implementation fee position, minimum commitment or pilot terms. Sales run through a demo booking form.

Does Videra Health charge an implementation fee?

Not disclosed. Videra publishes no implementation, integration or onboarding fee and no implementation timeline. Onboarding effort is nowhere costed despite being clearly non trivial: the platform integrates with named record systems spanning addiction treatment, behavioral health, senior living and the two major acute systems, and the company markets a connect once model that implies an integration project at the front. Ambient documentation and assessment write back into a clinical record are each their own build, and nothing indicates whether either is included, charged separately, or scoped per customer.

Does Videra Health offer a business associate agreement?

Not disclosed as a template or posture. What is published covers the surrounding regime in detail and is silent on the agreement itself. SOC 2 Type II is held and a public trust center is published, though the report itself is released to customers under a non disclosure agreement and the audit period is not stated. HIPAA compliance is claimed alongside SOC 2 under the heading of industry standard certifications, when only the first is externally attested. A redisclosure consent notice is published as a standing page, which indicates the separate federal confidentiality regime governing substance use disorder treatment records has been engaged rather than overlooked. No business associate agreement template, negotiation stance, execution requirement or subcontractor flow down position is published, and how substance use records are segregated in practice is not described.