MedAI Verdict
All comparisons

Gleamer vs ScreenPoint Transpara

Gleamer lists a mammography product, BreastView, on gleamer.ai. BreastView does not appear among the openFDA records under Gleamer's applicant names, which cover BoneView, BoneMetrics, ChestView US and Pixyl.Neuro. Those cleared products suit a hospital trauma service reading fractures and chest films.

For a US breast imaging center on tomosynthesis, Gleamer loses. ScreenPoint says Transpara is FDA cleared for 2D and 3D mammography, and openFDA lists eight Transpara 510(k) records, the latest K260898 on August 14, 2026, one of them the density tool K232096.

Screening programs and breast centers reading 2D or 3D mammograms with single or double reading are Transpara's fit. ScreenPoint says the Swedish MASAI trial used it and reports sensitivity of 80.5% against 73.8% for standard double reading at 98.5% specificity across more than 105,000 women. MASAI compared AI-supported reading with standard double reading.

Radiology · Reviewed November 2, 2026

Gleamer logo

Gleamer

by Gleamer SAS

Radiology AI for fracture and chest X-ray findings, plus CT, MRI and mammography; part of RadNet DeepHealth since March 2026.

ScreenPoint Transpara logo

ScreenPoint Transpara

by ScreenPoint Medical

Transpara Breast AI: cancer detection support, density and risk tools for 2D and 3D mammograms.

When to pick each one

Gleamer

  • BoneView, ChestView and BoneMetrics with US clearances
  • Reads fractures and chest films for trauma services
Read the full Gleamer review

ScreenPoint Transpara

  • Eight 510(k)s, latest K260898 in August 2026
  • Vendor says 2D and 3D mammography, vendor agnostic
  • Vendor says Transpara was the tool in MASAI
Read the full ScreenPoint Transpara review

Score

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

Gleamer

56of 100

Solid choice

ScreenPoint Transpara

56of 100

Solid choice
Score by dimension for Gleamer and ScreenPoint Transpara
DimensionGleamerScreenPoint TransparaDifference
FDA clearance18 / 1818 / 180
HIPAA / SOC2 / BAA0 / 100 / 100
EHR integrations (count)0 / 4.20 / 4.20
Top-3 EHR coverage (Epic / Oracle / Athena)0 / 2.40 / 2.40
Peer-reviewed papers18.2 / 18.212.7 / 18.2+5.5
RCT / meta-analysis / systematic review0 / 7.87.8 / 7.8-7.8
Funding & adoption signal8.4 / 126 / 12+2.4
Pricing transparency2.5 / 52.5 / 50
Years in market0 / 60 / 60

Scroll horizontally to see every column.

How scores are computed

Pricing

Gleamer

TierMonthlyAnnualNotes
Enterprisen/an/aNo public price. Demo request only.

ScreenPoint Transpara

TierMonthlyAnnualNotes
Enterprisen/an/aNo public price. Virtual demo and contact only.

Evidence

Compliance and integrations

Documented from each vendor’s own pages.

SpecGleamerScreenPoint Transpara
Free tierNo / unverifiedNo / unverified
HIPAANo / unverifiedNo / unverified
SOC 2 Type IINo / unverifiedNo / unverified
EHR integrationsNot specifiedNot specified
Foundedn/an/a
HQFRNL

Scroll horizontally to see both columns.

Common questions

Open the full radiology comparison

Acute-care triage, mammography screening, CCTA plaque analysis, mobile MRI. 30+ FDA-cleared platforms across stroke, oncology, cardiac. Enterprise sales only — we compared what's deployed where.