Clinical systems · AI diagnosis and documentation
Regard
Regard is a clinical AI platform that runs inside the electronic health record, reviews a hospital patient's entire chart, recommends diagnoses with the supporting evidence, and drafts documentation that physicians accept or decline.
Strong fit
- Hospitals that want hospitalists to catch conditions buried in the chart
- Clinical documentation teams that want fewer queries sent to physicians
- Health systems that want diagnosis support inside the EHR with no separate app
Weak fit
- Outpatient practices that mainly need an ambient scribe
- Hospitals that cannot justify a premium price against the revenue gain
- Buyers who want published prices
Bottom line
Regard is clinical AI that reads a hospital patient's full chart inside the EHR, recommends diagnoses with evidence, and drafts notes. It suits health systems that want hospital physicians to miss fewer conditions and want documentation that holds up with coders and payers. Practices that mainly want an ambient scribe should look elsewhere.
Score breakdown
Weights: Outcomes 35% · Product 30% · Implementation 20% · Pricing clarity 15%.
Regard is used by hospital physicians, especially hospitalists, and by the clinical documentation integrity (CDI) and revenue cycle teams who review their notes. When a doctor opens a patient in the EHR, Regard has already read the notes, labs, medications, and test results, flagged conditions the chart supports but nobody has documented, and drafted a note with the evidence. The doctor accepts or declines each suggested diagnosis. Regard says thousands of clinicians use it across more than 150 hospitals.
Regard sells to health systems, does not publish prices, and makes its case on the revenue that complete documentation brings in. Some buyers question that math: executives quoted on KLAS Research commentary praise the training and frequent upgrades, while others say the financial case is hard at its price. Chief executive Eli Ben-Joseph told TechCrunch that Regard's competitors include Engage One from 3M and the startup Pieces. Among companies we review, SmarterDx reviews charts after the encounter to find missed diagnoses, CodaMetrix automates coding, Navina summarizes charts for primary care, and ambient scribes such as Abridge draft notes from the visit conversation.
He started the company in 2016 as HealthTensor with long-time friends, including Nate Wilson, now chief operating officer. Its first major customer, Torrance Memorial Medical Center in Torrance, California, signed in 2021 after a year of testing, he told Calibrate Ventures. Banner Health piloted Regard at one hospital in 2022 and in March 2024 said it would roll it out to all 33 of its acute-care hospitals.
In July 2024 Regard raised a $61 million Series B led by Oak HC/FT, with Cedars-Sinai Health Ventures joining, and TechCrunch reported that its revenue grew 4.5 times in 2023 and that the company was valued at $350 million. Regard has an estimated $50 million in annual revenue. Other customers include Sentara Health, Montefiore Medical Center, and Cedars-Sinai.
On October 20, 2026, Sentara Health, a 12-hospital system in Virginia and North Carolina, announced a case management tool built with Regard that lets case managers ask questions about a chart in plain language and see what changed in the past 24 hours. Sentara estimates it could save nearly 90,000 hours. Regard's homepage reports a 17% increase in CC/MCC capture at Sentara, meaning more of the complications and other conditions that raise a hospital's payment were documented, and says clinicians have accepted more than 12.9 million of its recommended diagnoses.
Regard says it is HIPAA compliant and SOC 2 and ONC certified, and that patient data stays inside the EHR. Until 2026 it mainly supported hospitalists, who see about half of admitted patients. In March 2026 Regard announced an expansion into cardiology and surgery, with The Guthrie Clinic among the pilot sites. It has also announced a collaboration to integrate its platform with Microsoft Dragon Copilot.
What customers say
What people like
"It found a diagnosis buried in old labs that changed how I treated the patient, and it showed me exactly where in the chart the evidence was."
"Our CDI team sends fewer queries now, because the diagnoses are already documented when the note is signed."
What people don't like
"Finance keeps asking whether the revenue gain covers the price, and that conversation comes back at every renewal."
"Moving beyond the hospitalist service is useful, but we want new specialties and diagnoses added faster."
Where customer reviews couldn't be found, our analysts attempted to give a voice to buyer sentiment, drawing on real information from review sites, forums, and product documentation.
Based on: KLAS Research commentary, TechCrunch, and Regard homepage.
Competitor landscape
| Vendor | Overall | Ease of implementation |
|---|---|---|
| Abridge | 8.4 | 7.8 |
| Navina | 7.9 | 7.4 |
| Regard | 7.7 | 7.3 |
| SmarterDx | 7.6 | 7.2 |
| CodaMetrix | 7.6 | 7.3 |
Pricing
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Model | Enterprise subscriptions with health systems, usually justified against documentation and revenue gains. |
| What usually drives cost | Number of hospitals and clinicians, the products licensed (clinical notes, mid-revenue cycle, HCC capture, screening), and specialties covered. |
| What to ask before you buy | Ask Regard how fees scale with beds or users, how revenue lift is measured, and what renewal pricing looks like. |
| Published pricing | Not published. |
Prerequisites for purchase
| Need | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| What you need to get Regard to function | |
| EHR integration approval | Regard runs inside the record. |
| Physician champions | Doctors must accept its suggestions. |
| CDI and coding leaders | They measure query and coding changes. |
| Baseline metrics | CC/MCC capture and query rates before launch. |
| What will maximize your value | |
| Start with hospitalists | Regard is strongest on inpatient medicine. |
| Train physicians in person | Adoption drives results. |
| Report wins to finance | Supports the renewal case. |
| Deal-breakers | |
| No EHR integration allowed | |
| Outpatient-only needs | |
| No physician adoption plan | |
Value creation time frame
| # | Stage | Typical range |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | EHR integration and pilot | 2-4 months |
| 2 | First hospital live | 3-6 months |
| 3 | Systemwide rollout | 6-18 months |
Leadership
Eli Ben-JosephCo-founder and CEO- Nate WilsonCo-founder and COO
Methodology
| Weight | Factor | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| 35% | Customer outcomes | Whether buyers get measurable operational or clinical-workflow results after go-live |
| 30% | Product | Capability depth, reliability, and fit for the job the category buys |
| 20% | Implementation | How hard it is to stand up, integrate, train, and stabilize |
| 15% | Pricing clarity | Whether a buyer can model total cost without a mystery quote |
| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Highly recommend | Strong outcomes and product with manageable caveats |
| Recommend | Solid fit for the right buyer; know the tradeoffs |
| Conditional | Only with a specific use case or heavy caveats |
| Not recommended | Avoid for most buyers in this category |
Read our full methodology for how we weight scores and assign recommend labels.