AI Medical Scribes, Scored: One Has a Randomized Trial Behind It

The best AI medical scribes depend on who controls your chart: Abridge for Epic health systems, Nabla for the only time saving proven in a randomized trial, Ambience for subspecialty coding, Freed and Heidi for clinicians paying their own way, Doximity Scribe if you want free today. Only three of the nine publish a price: Doximity $0, Heidi from $0 and Freed from $39 a month; the other six quote after a demo (verified Aug 12, 2026).

Updated August 2026. Every published price here was read off the vendor’s own site on August 12, 2026, and every absent price was confirmed absent the same day.

The nine at a glance

Scores are our judgment on documented evidence, not a benchmark, and the score column is not a buying order. Read the Best-for column first: the 7.4 at the bottom is free, and the 8.5 at the top may not sell to you at all.

Your EHR picks half this list for you

Most rankings pretend you’re choosing among nine products. You aren’t. Inside a health system on Epic, an informatics committee picks the scribe and hands it to you; Abridge, Ambience, DeepScribe and Dragon Copilot are almost never a personal purchase, and several won’t sell to a solo practice at all. Buying for yourself, the real shortlist is Freed, Heidi, Doximity and whatever your EHR bundles.

A DO in r/FamilyMedicine put the split more plainly than any vendor will: “Depends on the EMR. Doximity isn’t bad for just producing a note, however, the next level is EMR integration. There are some that will tee up orders based on your description of the plan or auto enter Dx codes.” His estimate for that second tier: “200 to 600 a month.”

So read the table as two products. One writes a note you paste. The other writes into the chart, and costs roughly ten times more.

Only three AI medical scribes publish a price

We opened all nine vendors’ pricing pages on the same morning. Three showed numbers. Six showed a form.

Freed’s page is the most useful and the most maddening. Every card renders two figures at once, $39 and $59 on Starter, $59 and $79 on Core, $104 and $119 on Premier, and the Monthly/Annually control never says which one it just applied. What Freed states outright is the floor: “plans starting at $39/mo”, with Starter capped at 40 notes a month, a fortnight for a full-time family doc (verified Aug 12, 2026).

Heidi is cleaner: $0 on Free, $110 per user per month on Clinician, $180 on Practice, trainees free (verified Aug 12, 2026). Doximity publishes the easiest number in the category: zero.

Then the wall. Abridge, Nabla, Ambience, Suki and DeepScribe all 404 at /pricing (all five re-checked Aug 12, 2026). Microsoft is the most interesting refusal, because it documents everything except the figure: its licensing article lists four Dragon Copilot licence types and explains when to buy each, then routes you to a representative or certified partner to learn what any of them costs.

One more thing before you trust a listicle here. Google’s AI Overview for this query told shoppers on August 6 that Heidi’s paid tiers run “up to $99/month.” Heidi’s own US page read $110 and $180 on August 12, 2026. The summary at the top of the results is quoting stale blog posts, and blog posts are where nearly every number in this category comes from.

The evidence nobody’s listicle leads with

On November 26, 2025, UCLA Health published a randomized clinical trial of ambient AI scribes in NEJM AI (DOI 10.1056/AIoa2501000): 238 physicians, 14 specialties, 72,000 patient encounters, two named products, Microsoft DAX and Nabla, against usual care.

Nabla users cut average time per note from 4 minutes 30 seconds to 3 minutes 49 seconds. The control group also improved, 4

to 4, so the real number is the gap: a 9.5% larger reduction, statistically significant. DAX’s improvement did not reach significance. Both arms showed roughly 7% better burnout scores, and fewer than 10% of patients declined to be recorded.

The same trial is the category’s strongest anti-hype document. Physicians reported that AI-generated notes “occasionally” contained clinically significant inaccuracies, most commonly omissions of information or pronoun errors, and one mild patient-safety event was logged. “This technology requires active physician oversight, not passive acceptance,” said senior author Dr. John N. Mafi.

Mind the limits: one academic medical centre, two months of encounters, November 2024 to January 2025. It doesn’t tell you Nabla beats Abridge. It tells you 41 seconds a note is the honest order of magnitude, and that vendors promising two hours a day are selling something the literature hasn’t found.

A footnote nobody quotes: UCLA disclosed that the press release announcing the trial was itself drafted by an AI and edited by humans. The finding, applied to the announcement.

The newer study, and it’s less flattering

Five months later, on April 17, 2026, a Veterans Health Administration team led by Dr. Ashok Reddy at the University of Washington published a different question in Annals of Internal Medicine (DOI 10.7326/ANNALS-25-02772): not whether a scribe saves time, but whether the note is any good. Audio from five standardized primary-care visits, notes written from it by 11 AI scribe tools and by 18 human clinicians (physicians, pharmacists and nurse care managers), then 30 blinded raters scoring every note on the modified PDQI-9.

In every case the human notes scored higher, in some cases dramatically so, with the AI notes weaker on accuracy, thoroughness, organization, usefulness and comprehensiveness. The authors’ conclusion is the line to carry into a procurement meeting: treat these as draft generators that require review and editing, not as a substitute for a clinician-authored note.

The two studies don’t contradict each other, and they aren’t the same kind of evidence: UCLA randomized clinicians and measured minutes, Washington was a cross-sectional read of the artifact itself. One found a real if modest saving. The other found the thing you sign is worse than what you’d have written. You finish sooner, and thinner, unless you edit.

We read the University of Washington’s summary, not the paper. The 11 tools aren’t named there, so this ranks nobody — which is also why no vendor on this page links it.

How we scored these AI medical scribes (and what we didn’t do)

We are not clinicians and we did not use these tools on patients. Where the failure mode is a wrong dose in a signed note, that distinction matters more than anywhere else we publish.

What we did: opened all nine vendors’ pricing and product pages, wrote down exactly what was there, five 404s included, then opened every one again on August 12, 2026 to see whether it still held. Read Microsoft’s licensing documentation, UCLA’s trial findings and the University of Washington’s summary of the note-quality study. Compared documented integrations and compliance claims. Read all three Reddit threads end to end, checked every quote here against the live thread, and flagged the astroturf where we found it. Vendor marketing numbers stay labelled as the vendor’s.

The tie-breakers that matter most, omission rate on an identical encounter and behaviour under an accent, need artifacts we haven’t captured.

Ratings are ours. No vendor saw a draft, and nobody on this page paid to be here.

Best for Epic health systems: Abridge

Abridge is the enterprise default, and clinicians who run it inside Epic mostly stop shopping. It reads prior chart history instead of treating every visit as a blank page, which is why the praise it earns is about capture rather than speed. A nurse practitioner’s example: the flexeril taken as needed for chronic back spasms, mentioned in passing, documented anyway, and waiting there for whoever has to decide on the refill.

Abridge’s own navigation badges Best in KLAS for 2025 and 2026, market leadership in the ambient AI segment for 2025, and 78% of Sutter Health clinicians reporting improved work satisfaction. All three were read on abridge.com on August 12, 2026. All three are still Abridge’s claims about Abridge; we did not obtain the KLAS reports behind them.

The price is a conversation: /pricing 404s, with no pricing link in the navigation or footer (verified Aug 12, 2026).

Skip it if you’re outside primary care and verbose output costs you time. A cardiology PA abandoned it after five-paragraph HPIs: “the way it documented my A/P was atrocious and unusable.”

Best for evidence you can check: Nabla

Nabla is the only tool here whose central claim went through a randomized trial run by someone else, and it won. It works across Epic, athenahealth, Oracle Health, NextGen and Greenway, adds dictation and coding, and says 85,000+ clinicians run 20 million encounters a year through it. Those are Nabla’s figures; the 9.5% is UCLA’s. It also wins bake-offs on price: a nurse practitioner whose facility trialled seven or eight tools landed on it because “Abridged was better all around, but was more expensive.”

Buy it for the ambient note, not for the microphone. That same NP’s facility dropped Dragon for Nabla’s dictation and found it “GARBAGE… It struggles with even the slightest accent and makes SPELLING errors.” Two products, one login, wildly different quality.

The self-serve free trial makes the missing price stranger: /pricing 404s (verified Aug 12, 2026). Two clinicians in r/FamilyMedicine, five months apart, independently report paying $119 a month. Their receipts, not the vendor’s page.

Skip it if you want a scribe that bends to your formatting. The recurring complaint is verbosity and weak adherence to custom instructions: “overly verbose and really struggles to adhere to my instructions.”

Best published price: Freed

Freed behaves like software you can buy. Four published tiers, seven days free without a credit card, templates for 20+ specialties, your format learned from a single edit, notes pushed into browser-based EHRs. It badges HIPAA, SOC 2 Type II and HITECH, and gives residents and trainees Core free.

The catch is the shape of the ladder. Starter’s $39 buys 40 notes a month, which a busy clinic burns in two weeks, so full-time work really starts at Core. The features most people actually want, EHR push and ICD-10 coding and patient instructions, sit one rung higher again on Premier (verified Aug 12, 2026). The widely-linked Reddit review still lists Freed at $99; the page now starts at $39.

Skip it if your notes are complex and idiosyncratic. Clinicians call Freed excellent on simple visits and thin on flexibility: “very basic, but I think that’s the point.”

Best for subspecialty work and coding: Ambience Healthcare

Ambience sells to the CFO as much as the clinician. It runs inside Epic Toolbox on the Ambient Module and FHIR APIs, and pushes HCC opportunities, E/M level guidance and ICD-10 and CPT suggestions into the encounter itself. Its list runs past eighty subspecialties, from neurotology to transplant hepatology, which matters because generic scribes fall apart fastest outside family medicine.

Its numbers are all its own: 80% encounter-level utilisation, 45% less charting time, $13K in revenue per clinician per year at St. Luke’s, a 27% coding-accuracy improvement over board-certified physicians, a 2026 KLAS/CHIME Trailblazer award. Ambience’s figures, Ambience’s charts. No price is published; /pricing 404s (verified Aug 12, 2026) and the site’s only CTA is Book a Demo (read Aug 5, 2026).

Skip it if you’re not on Epic and not buying for a system. Everything about the deployment assumes revenue-integrity stakeholders in the room.

Best free tier: Heidi

Heidi’s free plan is the one genuinely unmetered entry in the category: $0, unlimited AI documentation, unlimited clinical evidence answers with citations, no trial clock (verified Aug 12, 2026). Paid tiers buy advanced templates, personalization, coding and team controls at $110 per user per month on Clinician and $180 on Practice; verified trainees get Clinician for nothing.

Clinicians who like Heidi like it for template control: they dictate, and it returns letters, medical-necessity notes and ECG interpretations in their house style. The ones who don’t say the public roadmap has been full of “coming soon” for a year, and that the Android app crashed often enough to lose whole visits.

Skip it if you need the free tier to be the whole answer. Free gives you standard templates in full, the advanced ones only in Heidi’s own “Limited” form, coding not at all, and EHR integration is a paid add-on even on Clinician (verified Aug 12, 2026). The customization that makes Heidi worth choosing sits behind the $110 line.

Best for orders and coding: Suki

Suki treats the note as a beginning, not an end. It stages orders straight from the conversation for review, generates ICD-10, HCC, CPT and E/M codes, and claims 100+ specialties and 80 languages across ambulatory, inpatient, ED and telehealth.

Its pricing page doesn’t exist: /pricing 404s (re-checked Aug 12, 2026), and no pricing link appears in the navigation or footer. Doximity’s competitive listicle estimates roughly $299 per workspace per month, which is a rival’s estimate, not a verified figure.

Skip it if documentation is your only problem. Suki’s coding and order-staging depth is priced into a platform; if you just want a clean SOAP note, Freed or Heidi do it for a published fraction.

Best if you already run Dragon: Microsoft Dragon Copilot

Dragon Copilot succeeds DAX Copilot and Dragon Medical One, and its argument is institutional gravity: role-based builds for physicians, nurses and radiologists, embedded in Epic and Epic Rover. Its Flex licence is genuinely distinctive, dictation billed per user with ambient and generative features metered pay-as-you-go, and no other vendor here offers anything like it.

Three honest marks against it. It is the arm of the UCLA trial that missed statistical significance. Microsoft publishes licence types and no prices (verified Aug 12, 2026). And clinicians running its DAX predecessor inside Epic describe babysitting: “if you really want it to save time you have to alter your speech during the visit.” One of them spells it out. You narrate the plan aloud, problem by problem, so the model can hear an assessment. That’s a workflow change sold as a time saving.

Skip it if you want customization. The NP whose hospital moved to Epic and handed her DAX summarized the trade in three words procurement never uses: “I miss Heidi.”

Best for oncology: DeepScribe

DeepScribe made the sharpest strategic move here: it stopped competing for every clinician and rebuilt around oncology. It leads with pre-visit intelligence, embeds inside OncoEMR and iKnowMed as well as Epic, and aims its coding at HCC capture. It claims a 98.8/100 score in a 2025 KLAS Spotlight report and reach across 90% of community oncology centres. DeepScribe’s claims, DeepScribe’s report.

It publishes no price; /pricing returns a 404 (verified Aug 12, 2026). Doximity’s listicle estimates $350–$500 per user per month; again, a competitor’s estimate.

Skip it if you’re not in oncology or an adjacent specialty. Everything that makes DeepScribe good now is aimed at cancer care, and primary-care buyers are no longer the customer.

Best free option today: Doximity Scribe

Doximity Scribe costs nothing, needs no IT, and works on mobile and desktop: pick a note type, record the visit, edit the draft. Doximity says you then “send it directly to the patient’s chart in seconds” and never explains how; no EHR integration is named anywhere on the page, and every clinician report we’ve read describes moving the note across by hand (verify). For a moonlighting shift, or a solo practice testing whether ambient documentation is worth anything at all, it’s the cheapest possible experiment.

The free claim is first-party and specific. Doximity’s product page states it plainly: “Scribe is free for all U.S. physicians, NPs, PAs, and medical students with a verified Doximity account” (verified Aug 12, 2026). Read the eligibility list rather than the word free — nurses, therapists and non-US clinicians aren’t on it. The page is equally specific about what it omits: it publishes no audio-retention window at all, which for a free product is the term you’d most want in writing. Two clinicians corroborate from the outside: the DO who opened the November r/FamilyMedicine thread is “currently using Doximity’s free one,” and an NP in r/medicine says “don’t sleep on the freebies.”

Skip it if accuracy is the thing you’re buying. A nurse left it after a fabrication: “it hallucinated on me and made me second guess if that’s what the patient actually said.”

What physicians actually say

The most substantial independent document in this category is a Reddit post: I tried all the AI medical scribes so you don’t have to, by a family physician who ran six scribes during real patient care. Posted 30 June 2025; 126 comments as of August 5, 2026. A shorter November 2025 thread adds 49 more.

His ranking: Vero Scribe first, then Freed, Heidi, Nabla, Scribeberry and Tali AI, at $79, $99, $99, $119, $99 and $150 a month. Those are his mid-2025 receipts, already contradicted by the vendors’ own 2026 pages, which is why we date-stamp ours.

Two things in the comments matter more than the ranking. The top-voted reply isn’t about accuracy at all: “Any info of how they retain the data/recordings?” asks a verified MD. “One issue with these scribes is the malpractice risk.” Nobody in the thread answers it properly.

Nor does most of the industry. Exactly one of the nine answers it on the page you’d buy from: Freed’s pricing FAQ says audio is held “until note summaries and quality checks are complete — then they are automatically deleted.” Heidi’s plan table advertises “flexible data retention” without saying flexible between what and what (both verified Aug 12, 2026). The rest leave you to ask in a sales call.

The hallucination stories, meanwhile, are specific and funny until they aren’t. Heidi’s note recorded a patient describing his mood as an obscenity. The patient had said “okay,” in a French accent.

Read both with your guard up. The June post’s top pick is a small vendor endorsed in a suspiciously tidy cluster of short, enthusiastic one-liners; one commenter posts a referral link dressed as advice; and an account carrying a scribe vendor’s name in its handle turns up in both threads writing paragraphs of neutral-sounding analysis. The single highest-voted comment in the November thread is a fluent, feature-listing endorsement of a scribe called TwoFold, whose only other mention across either thread is a physician saying he tried it and didn’t like it. Draw your own conclusion.

The consensus that survives all that is dull and correct: “IF it does not integrate with an EMR what is the point? Where does the note go?” The most-upvoted free suggestion in November was OpenEvidence, backed by two clinicians, one of whom had just dropped Freed for it. We could not reach openevidence.com to check what its scribe does or costs (verify).

What the r/medicine crosspost adds

The same family doc reposted his ranking to r/medicine on 18 July 2025, where a different crowd answered: 120 comments, re-read August 12, 2026. Four things there don’t appear in the r/FamilyMedicine threads.

The thread’s top comment, at 49 points, is about a tool that isn’t among the nine above. Sunoh.ai comes bundled inside eClinicalWorks and is the only other scribe we found publishing a price, $149 per user per month with a “for a limited time” flag on it (verified Aug 12, 2026). The verdict, from an internist and hospitalist a decade out of medical school: “mostly good at picking up what is said and filters out what it thinks is not relevant. It doesn’t capture who says what very well. It also is complete trash at anything beyond HPI.”

Abridge gets both barrels. “Using Abridge integrated into Epic and loving it,” writes one MD. Directly underneath, an emergency physician says the notes reaching him “create long blocks of story,” are “not concise,” and that the assessment and plan is “not useful for ER at all.” Both can be true: these tools are tuned for the clinician writing the note, not the one reading it at 3am.

Suki draws the most precise failure report anywhere on this page. A med-peds physician calls it life-changing, notes approvingly that it keeps the transcript seven days and deletes it, then adds: “I am female and I have to be careful chatting with female patients about myself because it will sometimes confuse me for the patient.” She also catches it writing the patient’s opinion of their own condition into the assessment as though she had agreed with it. Speaker attribution is the category’s unsolved problem, and it breaks along the line you’d predict.

Then the comment that outranks every scribe recommendation but one. “As a patient, I don’t want an AI company to have the transcript of my medical visits” — 32 points, and posted by a physician. A colleague answered with the spec: transient, “deleted after 30 days,” at least in Abridge. It didn’t land: “No good enough for me. To each their own.” A doctor refusing, as a patient, the product doctors are being sold — and it is the second-most-upvoted comment in the thread.

One caution the vote counts don’t carry: the Vero Scribe pattern repeats here, the OP pushing his own top pick down the thread until another clinician says he trialled it “on account of OP’s plug for Vero” and came back preferring Heidi. Same author, same ranking, two subreddits. Count it once.

This is software coverage, not clinical guidance

Everything above is about buying documentation tooling, not advice about care. None of these products transfers responsibility for a note. The clinician who signs it owns every line, including the ones a model wrote and the ones it quietly left out, and omissions were the most common clinically significant error the UCLA trial found. Ask for the audio-retention window in writing before you sign anything. It’s the one specification that follows you into a deposition.

FAQ

What is an AI medical scribe?

An AI medical scribe listens to a clinical encounter, transcribes it, and drafts a structured note — usually a SOAP note — for the clinician to review, edit and sign into the EHR. The category is also called ambient AI documentation. It replaces typing and after-hours charting, not clinical judgment.

How much does an AI medical scribe cost?

Three of the nine publish a price: Doximity Scribe is free, Freed starts at $39 per month (Starter, 40 notes), and Heidi runs $0 to $180 per user per month (verified Aug 12, 2026). Abridge, Nabla, Ambience, Suki, DeepScribe and Dragon Copilot quote after a demo; clinicians report enterprise tools landing between $200 and $600 a month.

Is there a free AI medical scribe?

Two. Doximity Scribe is free to verified US physicians, NPs, PAs and medical students; Heidi’s Free plan is unmetered for documentation, not a countdown trial (verified Aug 12, 2026). Neither includes EHR integration at that price. Trials cover the rest: seven days at Freed with no card, 14 on Heidi Clinician.

Do AI scribes actually save time?

Modestly, on the only randomized evidence available. In UCLA Health’s trial in NEJM AI, Nabla users cut time per note by about 41 seconds — a 9.5% larger reduction than the control group — while Microsoft DAX’s improvement was not statistically significant. Both arms showed roughly 7% better burnout scores.

Which AI medical scribe is most accurate?

No independent ranking names a winner, and any page claiming one is guessing. The finding that does exist is worse for all of them: in an Annals of Internal Medicine study published April 2026, blinded raters scored notes from 11 unnamed AI scribes below notes from 18 human clinicians on accuracy, thoroughness and usefulness. Treat per-tool accuracy claims as marketing.

Which AI scribe integrates with Epic?

Abridge, Nabla, Ambience, Suki, Dragon Copilot and DeepScribe all document Epic integration, and Ambience uses the Epic Ambient Module and FHIR APIs to read and write the chart. Freed pushes into browser-based EHRs; Heidi sells integration as an add-on; Doximity names no EHR at all. Confirm depth with IT — the phrase covers very different things.

Changelog

• 2026-08-12 — Independent QA of the August 6 evidence pass, plus a full re-verification of every price. Re-read live: Freed’s four cards, Heidi’s three, Doximity’s free tier on Doximity’s own page, all five /pricing 404s, Microsoft’s four licence types with no figures, Sunoh’s $149, and the r/medicine thread in full. Four corrections. The r/medicine comment about patient privacy was described as the thread’s highest-voted and as coming from someone who isn’t a clinician; it is the second-highest at 32 points, behind the Sunoh review at 49, and the account carries MD flair. The Sunoh reviewer was described as ten years post-residency; the flair reads PGY-10, so the page now says a decade out of medical school. Doximity Scribe’s “discards the recording” and “paste into any EHR” claims had no first-party source and were replaced with what the product page does and does not say, including that it publishes no retention window. The structured-data Offer for Doximity still carried the old, broader eligibility wording and pointed at Doximity’s blog rather than its product page. Added: the Annals DOI (10.7326/ANNALS-25-02772) and the composition of the human comparison group, Freed’s published audio-retention answer against Heidi’s unspecified one, the seven-day transcript window a Suki user reports, the 30-day Abridge window offered in reply to the privacy comment, and the OP’s Vero Scribe plug pattern. Trimmed elsewhere so the page nets roughly level.
• 2026-08-06 — Evidence pass; no ranking, score or existing price changed. Added the April 17, 2026 Annals of Internal Medicine note-quality study (University of Washington and the Veterans Health Administration: 11 AI scribes and 18 human clinicians writing from five standardized visits, 30 blinded raters, modified PDQI-9, human notes higher on every domain), read via the university’s newsroom summary rather than the paper. Read the July 2025 r/medicine crosspost that the previous pass had flagged as unfetched and unquotable, and added the four things it holds that the r/FamilyMedicine threads don’t: the eClinicalWorks internist on Sunoh.ai, the emergency physician’s case against Abridge’s verbosity, the med-peds physician’s speaker-attribution failure in Suki, and a patient out-voting every tool recommendation in the thread. Recorded Sunoh.ai’s published $149 per user per month as the one other price in the category, outside the ranked nine. Doximity Scribe’s free status upgraded from the vendor’s blog to its own product page and narrowed to Doximity’s actual eligibility list — US physicians, NPs, PAs and medical students — after the previous copy read broader than the source. The accuracy and free-scribe FAQ answers were rewritten in body and structured data to match. Keyword targets re-confirmed unchanged: primary “ai medical scribes”, 5,400/mo, SD 31, $26.63 CPC.
• 2026-08-05 — Independent QA pass. Six sources re-fetched from scratch rather than trusted: Freed’s and Heidi’s pricing pages, Abridge’s and Nabla’s 404s, and both r/FamilyMedicine threads, plus UCLA’s trial release. Every quote on the page was checked verbatim against the live thread. Three corrections: OpenEvidence was described as the November thread’s highest-voted answer when it is the highest-voted free suggestion; Heidi’s free tier was described as standard templates only when Heidi’s own table shows advanced templates as “Limited”; and the DAX anecdote was attributed to a Dragon Copilot rollout rather than to DAX itself. The inferred annual/monthly mapping of Freed’s unlabelled price cards was removed from the body and from the structured data after a QA re-fetch returned a different pairing than the writer’s read. Added: Nabla’s dictation failing on accents and spelling, the Abridge KLAS and Sutter figures located on Abridge’s own site, the trial’s DOI and study window, and the astroturf pattern in the November thread’s top comment.
• 2026-08-05 — Verified refresh. Keyword targets re-pulled via keyword_overview (the July build ran on rate-limited suggestions data): the singular “ai medical scribe” reads SD 55, the plural SD 31 at identical 5,400 volume, so the primary target flipped to “ai medical scribes” and the title, H1 and meta were re-cut around it. Ambience Healthcare and Doximity Scribe added after a fresh SERP pull, taking the page to nine tools and the published-price count from two to three. All nine prices re-read: Freed and Heidi unchanged, five /pricing 404s re-confirmed, and Microsoft’s pricing absence re-verified against its Learn licensing article. Second r/FamilyMedicine thread (Nov 2025, 49 comments) read and quoted. Recorded that Google’s AI Overview for this query is quoting stale Heidi and Freed prices.
• 2026-07-30 — Page created. Prices read off every vendor’s own site: Freed (from $39/month, 40-note cap on Starter) and Heidi ($0, $110, $180), plus confirmed-absent pricing for Abridge, Nabla, Suki, DeepScribe and Dragon Copilot. UCLA Health’s NEJM AI trial read and cited; r/FamilyMedicine source thread read in full and quotes verified. SERP recorded: seven of the organic top eight for “best ai medical scribes 2026” are vendors ranking their own listicles, two at #1 for their own products.

---

Independent, no paid placements. Every price verified on the vendor’s own site and date-stamped; every tool carries a skip-it line; the changelog stays public. See how we score AI tools and our independence charter. More on the AI tools index and the pricing index. Related: AI note takers, AI transcription tools, legal AI tools.