MedAI Verdict
All comparisons

Bayesian Health vs Implicity

Implicity raised a EUR 35M growth round on September 9, 2026, led by IRIS with Five Arrows. Its buyer is a cardiology device clinic following pacemakers, ICDs and loop recorders from Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic and MicroPort, which the vendor calls manufacturer-agnostic. FDA lists three 510(k) clearances for Implicity, IM007 (K210543), SignalHF for heart failure risk (K230842) and the ILR ECG Analyzer (K253463). The two papers with Implicity authors cover its insertable-monitor algorithm and its AF alert filtering. PubMed lists no peer-reviewed validation under SignalHF, and the vendor cites Health Data Hub data and a 26% mortality reduction against conventional remote monitoring.

Bayesian Health is a Johns Hopkins spinout whose FDA-cleared sepsis flag descends from the TREWS system, and the inpatient sepsis lead at a Medicare hospital is the person who buys it. SignalHF scores heart failure risk from implanted-device data in outpatient follow-up, while Bayesian reads inpatient EHR data for sepsis, so each answers to a different clinical owner.

Decision support · Reviewed November 2, 2026

Bayesian Health logo

Bayesian Health

by Bayesian Health

Sepsis flagging software that monitors EHR data continuously and shows a high-risk flag in the chart. FDA 510(k) cleared April 2026.

IM

Implicity

by Implicity · founded 2016

Cloud platform for remote monitoring of pacemakers and ICDs, with AI alert filtering and heart failure risk scoring for device clinics.

When to pick each one

Bayesian Health

  • Inpatient sepsis flag, FDA 510(k) cleared
  • Sepsis flag descends from Johns Hopkins TREWS
Read the full Bayesian Health review

Implicity

  • Pacemaker and ICD remote monitoring across five makers' devices
  • SignalHF heart failure risk score, FDA K230842
  • Raised EUR 35M in September 2026
Read the full Implicity review

Score

Each row shows points earned of points available under the published rubric.

Bayesian Health

33of 100

Competitive

Implicity

36of 100

Competitive
Score by dimension for Bayesian Health and Implicity
DimensionBayesian HealthImplicityDifference
FDA clearance12 / 1212 / 120
HIPAA / SOC2 / BAA0 / 100 / 100
EHR integrations (count)0 / 5.60 / 5.60
Top-3 EHR coverage (Epic / Oracle / Athena)0 / 4.80 / 4.80
Bidirectional write-back0 / 1.20 / 1.20
Peer-reviewed papers8.4 / 218.4 / 210
RCT / meta-analysis / systematic review0 / 90 / 90
Funding & adoption signal6 / 123 / 12+3
Pricing transparency1.3 / 2.51.3 / 2.50
Years in market0 / 66 / 6-6

Scroll horizontally to see every column.

How scores are computed

Pricing

Bayesian Health

TierMonthlyAnnualNotes
Enterprisen/an/aNo public price.

Implicity

TierMonthlyAnnualNotes
Enterprisen/an/aNo public price.

Evidence

Bayesian Health

FDA decisions

Peer-reviewed

1 PubMed record names Bayesian Health.

Implicity

FDA decisions

Peer-reviewed

1 PubMed record names Implicity.

Compliance and integrations

Documented from each vendor’s own pages.

SpecBayesian HealthImplicity
Free tierNo / unverifiedNo / unverified
HIPAANo / unverifiedNo / unverified
SOC 2 Type IINo / unverifiedNo / unverified
EHR integrationsNot specifiedNot specified
Foundedn/a2016
HQUSFR

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.