eCART vs PaceMate
PaceMate's security page lists ISO/IEC 27001, HITRUST r2, SOC 2 Type 2, SOC 3 and HIPAA with a BAA available, and the vendor describes bi-directional connections to Epic, Oracle Health and athenahealth. Those lines suit a cardiology device clinic running pacemaker and loop recorder remote monitoring, where the vendor claims Auto-Triage cut physician alert burden 61% and loop recorder false-positive alerts 73%. The vendor says Auto-Script automates documentation for CPT 93294 to 93298. Four pricing tiers carry no amounts, and the pages carry no FDA statement.
Inpatient ward leadership evaluating deterioration scoring is eCART's audience. It begins scoring once any vital sign is charted for a hospitalized ward patient 18 or older, and its indication is death or ICU transfer. The cloud engine is described as SOC 2 and HIPAA compliant, and access runs through a demo request.
Decision support · Reviewed November 2, 2026
When to pick each one
eCART
- Ward deterioration scoring with FDA K233253
- Pricing through demo request, no list price
PaceMate
- Epic, Oracle Health and athenahealth, bi-directional
- ISO 27001, HITRUST r2, SOC 2 Type 2, SOC 3
- Auto-Triage ranks device alerts by priority
Score
Each row shows points earned of points available under the published rubric.
eCART
56of 100
PaceMate
47of 100
| Dimension | eCART | PaceMate | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| FDA clearance | 12 / 12 | 0 / 12 | +12 |
| HIPAA / SOC2 / BAA | 10 / 10 | 10 / 10 | 0 |
| EHR integrations (count) | 0 / 5.6 | 1.7 / 5.6 | -1.7 |
| Top-3 EHR coverage (Epic / Oracle / Athena) | 0 / 4.8 | 4.8 / 4.8 | -4.8 |
| Bidirectional write-back | 0 / 1.2 | 0 / 1.2 | 0 |
| Peer-reviewed papers | 21 / 21 | 14.7 / 21 | +6.3 |
| RCT / meta-analysis / systematic review | 0 / 9 | 4.5 / 9 | -4.5 |
| Funding & adoption signal | 3 / 12 | 3 / 12 | 0 |
| Pricing transparency | 1.3 / 2.5 | 1.3 / 2.5 | 0 |
| Years in market | 0 / 6 | 0 / 6 | 0 |
Scroll horizontally to see every column.
Pricing
eCART
| Tier | Monthly | Annual | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enterprise | n/a | n/a | No public price. There is no pricing page; the site offers a demo request only. |
PaceMate
| Tier | Monthly | Annual | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enterprise | n/a | n/a | No public price. |
Evidence
eCART
FDA decisions
K233253 (opens in new tab)510(k)2024-06-21
eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite (eCART)
Peer-reviewed
5 PubMed records name eCART.
- Early Warning Scores With and Without Artificial Intelligence. (opens in new tab)
- Multicenter Development and Prospective Validation of eCARTv5: A Gradient Boosted Machine Learning Early Warning Score. (opens in new tab)
- DETERIO-LLM: enhancing traditional deterioration risk scores with clinical context and advanced reasoning. (opens in new tab)
PaceMate
FDA decisions
No FDA decision cited in our research as of November 2, 2026.
Peer-reviewed
3 PubMed records name PaceMate.
Compliance and integrations
Documented from each vendor’s own pages.
| Spec | eCART | PaceMate |
|---|---|---|
| Free tier | ||
| HIPAA | ||
| SOC 2 Type II | ||
| EHR integrations | Not specified | Epic, Oracle Health, athenahealth |
| Founded | n/a | n/a |
| HQ | US | n/a |
Scroll horizontally to see both columns.
Common questions
Open the full decision support comparison
Differential diagnosis, treatment guidance, drug interactions, evidence-grounded Q&A. The CDS landscape ranges from the UpToDate gold standard to physician-only OpenEvidence. We compared what clinicians actually use.


