Studies built from the vendor corpus, not from a survey nobody answered
Findings from the 328 vendor profiles in the Content Hub, each scored on the same 8 published facts. Every figure in a report is recomputed from those profiles when the page is rebuilt, so a report and the profiles behind it cannot drift apart. One market study, 30-1 vendor reviews and a 47-part State of AI series are live.
Published studies
Each report states its method, its capture date and what it is not. Numbers are computed from the corpus at build time rather than typed in, so a figure in a report and the profile behind it always agree.
Medical record review statistics →
74% of 328 vendors will not say how long the work takes. EHR duplication, physician documentation hours, and claims-adjuster caseload data, every figure sourced.
2026-09-14 · 8 min read
Medical record review pricing →
What 328 vendors publish about price, and what 185 of them do not. Every published per-page rate in 1 table.
2026-08-23 · 9 min read
Medical record review cost, 2026 →
5 quotable findings from 328 vendor websites: 57 publish a price, 186 do not say how they bill, and the median lowest per-page rate is 8.5 cents.
2026-09-26 · 5 min read
Switching from InPractice AI, Dodon AI, ChatGPT, and Claude →
4 de-identified switching stories from August 2026, complaints quoted near-verbatim: duplicate-page billing on InPractice AI, merged VA notes on Dodon AI, ChatGPT's 10,000-page warning, and no BAA on Claude.
2026-09-02 · 10 min read
Wisedocs alternatives for large-scale review →
What breaks past 10,000 pages, what Wisedocs publishes, and how Medrecords AI, InPractice AI, SiftMed, and DigitalOwl compare on their published record.
2026-09-05 · 7 min read
Wisedocs review →
Built from published materials: chronologies with clinician QA, days-not-weeks turnaround, no published pricing, and alternatives to weigh.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
DigitalOwl review →
Built from published materials: structured data for insurers, 24-hour self-serve delivery, subscription pricing with no published rate.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
Supio review →
Built from published materials: agentic AI for plaintiff firms, chronologies to demand letters, subscription pricing with no published rate.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
InPractice AI review →
Built from published materials: $0.05/page pay-as-you-go record review, about 3 seconds a page, full price disclosure, and the alternatives.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
SiftMed review →
Built from published materials: AI file review for insurance and legal, under 30 minutes per claim file, no published pricing, and alternatives.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
EvenUp review →
Built from published materials: AI demand packages with 100+ expert QA, an Express 1-24 hour tier, and quote-based contracts with no published rate.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
Eve (eve.legal) review →
Built from published materials: EveOS for plaintiff firms, demand letters in minutes, quote-based pricing with no published rate.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
Filevine review →
Built from published materials: case management with AI Fields, Demands AI, and Medchron chronologies, quote-based with no published figures.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
Datavant review →
Built from published materials: the Ciox Health retrieval network, risk adjustment coding, and tokenization; no pricing or turnaround published.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
ChartSwap review →
Built from published materials: B2B record exchange linking requesters and providers, per-transaction fees, 7.5-day turnaround, HITRUST r2.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
Lexitas review →
Built from published materials: court reporting, record retrieval, and AI chronologies through a 30,000-strong network, with no published pricing.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
ExamWorks review →
Built from published materials: IME, peer review, bill review, and retrieval subsidiaries, URAC and HITRUST certified, no published pricing.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
Dane Street review →
Built from published materials: physician IME and peer review for workers’ comp, auto, and disability, URAC and HITRUST certified, no pricing.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
CLARA Analytics review →
Built from published materials: AI claims intelligence for insurers with the adjuster deciding, quote-based pricing, no published rate.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
CaseMark review →
Built from published materials: AI deposition summaries and cited chronologies, free to start with a $100/user/month Pro plan, SOC 2 Type II.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
Tavrn review →
Built from published materials: AI retrieval and chronologies for plaintiff firms, ~$40 per record request plus provider fees, chronology in an hour.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
Compex Legal Services review →
Built from published materials: nationwide retrieval since 1972, Asabell AI summarization, 15-20 day average turnaround, no published rate.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
Abstractive Health review →
Built from published materials: clinical AI summaries in minutes, a free tier, $99/user/month Standalone, FHIR and JSON export.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
Superinsight review →
Built from published materials: 100% AI review at $25-$80 per credit, chronologies $28-$54, reports in 15-60 minutes.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
InQuery review →
Built from published materials: AI plus human QA for claims work, 2-6 hours on a 300-500 page PI case, no published pricing.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
Dodonai review →
Built from published materials: usage-based subscriptions at $25-$83/month, roughly $0.008-$0.06 a page, summaries in minutes.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
CaseFleet review →
Built from published materials: litigation fact management with AI review, $30-$180 per user per month, users approve every extracted fact.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
MediScan review →
Built from published materials: 100% AI review for IME/QME physicians, $169-$445 monthly tiers, 1,000+ pages in under 15 minutes.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
Brighterway review →
Built from published materials: 100% AI workers’ comp record review from a YC-backed startup, fully demo-gated, no pricing or turnaround.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
LawPro.ai review →
Built from published materials: citation-backed AI review for PI firms, contact-for-pricing subscription, a 404 pricing page at capture.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
Anytime AI review →
Built from published materials: agentic AI for mass tort and med mal work, quote-based with no pricing page, hours-not-days turnaround.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
Parambil review →
Built from published materials: agentic AI record review for mass tort, Word/PDF export, no published pricing, a 95% faster claim with no baseline.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
OctopusLM review →
Built from published materials: 100% AI record review at $0.10 a page or $250 a month unlimited, Word and Excel export, HIPAA and PIPEDA.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
CaseFrame AI review →
Built from published materials: chronology software at a flat $200/month or $2,200/year, minutes turnaround, Word and HTML export.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
TackleAI review →
Built from published materials: searchable chronologies from records, billing, and pharmacy data; 3 of 8 rubric facts published, no pricing.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
OraClaim review →
Built from published materials: defense-side claims AI with a first-draft chronology in under 60 minutes and no published pricing.
2026-09-01 · 7 min read
State of AI, 2026
49 articles across 7 med-legal audiences, built from the same vendor pool as the studies above. Each one counts what named vendors publish on their own pages, with a capture date against every count.
IME physicians
- AI reads the file, the examiner signs: the new reality of IME work in 2026
- What's missing from AI record tools sold to IME physicians (we checked 30 of them)
- The IME physician's buyer's guide to AI record review, 2026
- The honest ranking of AI record review tools for IME physicians, 2026
- What the top 10% of IME practices look like in 2026
- The issues IME physicians and their networks report with AI record summaries (with the reviews)
- IME AI vendor watch: Q4 2026
7 articles · 2026-09-07
QMEs (California)
- AI summarizes, the QME opines: the new reality of California med-legal reports in 2026
- What's missing from AI tools sold for QME reports
- The QME's buyer's guide to AI record review, 2026
- Every AI tool that claims to help QMEs, ranked honestly (2026)
- What the top 10% of QMEs do differently with records in 2026
- What QMEs and applicant attorneys say goes wrong with AI record summaries (with the reviews)
- QME AI vendor watch: Q4 2026
7 articles · 2026-09-07
Medical expert witnesses
- AI drafts, the expert testifies: the new reality of medical expert work in 2026
- What's missing from AI tools for medical expert witnesses (and why cross-examination will ask)
- The medical expert's buyer's guide to AI record review, 2026
- The shortlist: AI record tools a medical expert can defend under cross (2026)
- What the top 10% of medical experts do with a 10,000-page record in 2026
- All the issues courts have found with AI-assisted work product (and what they mean for experts)
- Expert witness AI vendor watch: Q4 2026
7 articles · 2026-09-07
PI lawyers
- AI builds the case file, the attorney signs the demand: the new reality of PI practice in 2026
- What's missing from AI medical record tools for PI firms (we checked 39 of them)
- The PI firm's buyer's guide to AI medical record review, 2026
- The honest ranking of AI medical record review tools for PI firms, 2026
- What the top 1% of PI firms look like in 2026
- All the issues with AI medical record tools for PI firms, 2026: 172 reviews, 39 vendor sites, and what still goes wrong
- PI AI vendor watch: Q4 2026
7 articles · 2026-09-07
Legal nurse consultants
- AI does the work, the LNC approves: the new reality of legal nurse consulting in 2026
- What's missing from AI chronology tools: an LNC's checklist (17 tools checked)
- The LNC's buyer's guide to AI record review, 2026
- The honest ranking of AI chronology and record review tools for LNCs, 2026
- What the top 10% of LNCs look like in 2026
- The issues LNCs report with AI chronologies: dedup, missed entries, wrong dates (with the reviews)
- LNC AI vendor watch: Q4 2026
7 articles · 2026-09-07
Life care planners
- AI reads the records, the planner projects the costs: the new reality of life care planning in 2026
- Nobody is building AI for life care planners: what exists, what's missing, and what to use anyway (2026)
- The life care planner's buyer's guide to AI record review, 2026
- The shortlist: AI record tools that work for life care plans (2026)
- What the top 10% of life care planners do with records in 2026
- What reviewers report going wrong with AI record tools for life care planners
- Life care planning AI vendor watch: Q4 2026
7 articles · 2026-09-07
Insurance claims adjusters
- AI triages, the adjuster decides: the new reality of injury claims in 2026
- What's missing from AI claims tools when the medical file lands on the adjuster's desk (2026)
- The claims team's buyer's guide to AI medical review, 2026
- The honest ranking of AI medical review tools for claims teams, 2026
- What the top 10% of claims teams look like in 2026
- All the issues with AI claims and medical review tools, from 172 reviews and the earnings calls
- Claims AI vendor watch: Q4 2026
7 articles · 2026-09-07
The corpus behind these studies is public: 328 profiles across software and services, each scored on 8 rows. For head-to-head vendor comparisons rather than market-wide findings, see the alternatives pages.
Every number here is checkable
Including ours. 10 cents a page, duplicates not billed. Send a real file and compare the output with what you are paying for today.
Book a demo