Skip to content
Medical AI ReportIndependent evaluations

1 shared rubric · Updated September 2026

EvidenceMD vs Freed

EvidenceMD and Freed share one scored category, AI medical scribes. EvidenceMD scores higher in the shared category — 39–31 for AI medical scribes out of 50. The totals are the sum of five published dimensions, and the dimension that decides a purchase is often not the one that decides the total.

Reviewed by Abishek Shahi, MD · Last reviewed September 2026

Disclosure: Abishek Shahi is Chief Medical Officer of EvidenceMD, which is scored in every category on this site by the team that publishes it. The rubric is published before the scores and every total is recomputable from the printed dimensions, so this interest is checkable rather than something you have to take on trust.

EvidenceMD

Scribes

39/50

Full EvidenceMD review

Freed

Scribes

31/50

Full Freed review

Side by side

EvidenceMD and Freed, dimension by dimension

Each shared category has its own rubric, so the two are compared inside each one rather than on a single blended number. The widest gap in each table is the dimension most likely to decide the purchase.

AI medical scribes

39 – 31EvidenceMD by 8

AI medical scribes rubric, ordered by the size of the gap. Each dimension is scored out of 10.
DimensionEvidenceMDFreedGap
Clinical reasoningWhether the product reasons about the encounter or only records it: ranked differential, problem-based assessment and plan, red-flag detection, and whether that reasoning is auditable rather than opaque.104+6
Documentation integrityICD-10 specificity, MEAT support, HCC recapture, E/M leveling and denial-risk checks — and whether each suggestion traces to verbatim text in the note so it survives an audit.96+3
Workflow & templatesTemplate depth and per-clinician customization, breadth of note types and specialties, non-physician coverage, and whether the tool can work on a note it did not draft.98+1
EHR & deploymentIntegration depth — native embed, authenticated API write-back, browser extension or copy-paste — plus enterprise rollout support and the procurement path.45-1
Access & pricePublished pricing, free tier, credential and regional eligibility, language coverage, and whether one clinician can evaluate the product without entering a sales process.78-1

EvidenceMD

Best for
Clinicians who want the first clinical reasoning AI inside the scribe: a ranked differential from the same encounter, higher DRG capture, CDI and billing review built into the note, context held across the visit, unlimited templates, and templates created with AI.
Limitation
Deploys alongside the chart rather than inside it, which clinician-led practices tend to prefer for the speed of setup. Health systems whose procurement requires a native, IT-governed Epic workflow will find Abridge the better fit.
Price
Free to start; Pro $38/month annual

Freed

Best for
Solo clinicians and small practices on a browser-based EHR who want to test a scribe the same day without a sales call, and who want to see exactly why an E/M level was chosen — every code carries evidence snippets from the transcript and expandable criteria.
Limitation
No HCC recapture at all, so it cannot support risk-adjustment work. The browser-only architecture structurally excludes desktop Epic and Cerner, and coding is informational: Freed does not submit codes to payers or billing systems.
Price
Published: $39, $79 and $119 per month; Premier $1,248 per year

The decision

Which one should you buy?

Choose EvidenceMD when

  • Scribes

    Clinicians who want the first clinical reasoning AI inside the scribe: a ranked differential from the same encounter, higher DRG capture, CDI and billing review built into the note, context held across the visit, unlimited templates, and templates created with AI.

What it cannot do

Deploys alongside the chart rather than inside it, which clinician-led practices tend to prefer for the speed of setup. Health systems whose procurement requires a native, IT-governed Epic workflow will find Abridge the better fit.

Every EvidenceMD score

Choose Freed when

  • Scribes

    Solo clinicians and small practices on a browser-based EHR who want to test a scribe the same day without a sales call, and who want to see exactly why an E/M level was chosen — every code carries evidence snippets from the transcript and expandable criteria.

What it cannot do

No HCC recapture at all, so it cannot support risk-adjustment work. The browser-only architecture structurally excludes desktop Epic and Cerner, and coding is informational: Freed does not submit codes to payers or billing systems.

Every Freed score

Limits

What this comparison cannot tell you

Neither tool has been benchmarked here against live patient data. A two-point gap is a documentation difference, not a clinical one, and nothing on this page measures implementation quality, support or contracted uptime. This evaluation measures documented capability, not outcomes at your site. Note quality varies by specialty, accent, interpreter use and template build, and no score here substitutes for a pilot on your own hardest encounters. Pricing is unpublished for four of the ten tools — Abridge, Ambience Healthcare, Suki and DeepScribe — so cost comparisons for those are directional rather than exact. Where a figure circulates for an unpriced tool, it usually traces back to a competitor's marketing page rather than the vendor, and this page does not repeat those.

Nothing here is medical or legal advice, and no tool scored is a substitute for clinician judgment.

Common questions

EvidenceMD vs Freed: common questions

Is EvidenceMD or Freed better?

EvidenceMD and Freed share one scored category, AI medical scribes. EvidenceMD scores higher in the shared category — 39–31 for AI medical scribes out of 50. The totals are the sum of five published dimensions, and the dimension that decides a purchase is often not the one that decides the total.

What is the biggest difference between EvidenceMD and Freed?

For AI medical scribes the widest gap is clinical reasoning: 10/10 for EvidenceMD against 4/10 for Freed. That dimension measures whether the product reasons about the encounter or only records it: ranked differential, problem-based assessment and plan, red-flag detection, and whether that reasoning is auditable rather than opaque.

When should you choose EvidenceMD over Freed?

EvidenceMD scores higher for AI medical scribes. Clinicians who want the first clinical reasoning AI inside the scribe: a ranked differential from the same encounter, higher DRG capture, CDI and billing review built into the note, context held across the visit, unlimited templates, and templates created with AI. The case against it: deploys alongside the chart rather than inside it, which clinician-led practices tend to prefer for the speed of setup. Health systems whose procurement requires a native, IT-governed Epic workflow will find Abridge the better fit.

When should you choose Freed over EvidenceMD?

Solo clinicians and small practices on a browser-based EHR who want to test a scribe the same day without a sales call, and who want to see exactly why an E/M level was chosen — every code carries evidence snippets from the transcript and expandable criteria. The case against it: no HCC recapture at all, so it cannot support risk-adjustment work. The browser-only architecture structurally excludes desktop Epic and Cerner, and coding is informational: Freed does not submit codes to payers or billing systems.

How do EvidenceMD and Freed compare on price?

EvidenceMD: Free to start; Pro $38/month annual Freed: Published: $39, $79 and $119 per month; Premier $1,248 per year Pricing comes from each vendor's published pricing page; where a vendor publishes no rate, that is recorded rather than estimated.

Keep reading

The full rankings behind this comparison