MedAI Verdict
All comparisons

Implicity vs Navina

A cardiac device clinic monitoring pacemakers, ICDs, CRT devices and insertable loop recorders from Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic and MicroPort is Implicity's buyer. The cloud platform scores heart failure risk from device data (SignalHF) and filters atrial fibrillation alerts. OpenFDA lists SignalHF's clearance, K230842, on October 25, 2023, while the vendor's press release gives May 17, 2024. The vendor says its ILR ECG Analyzer cuts false positives 79% on Medtronic recordings at 99% sensitivity. A 2023 Europace evaluation of its insertable-monitor algorithm, 879 abnormal episodes in 546 patients with Implicity authors, reported 98.6% sensitivity and 76.0% specificity. A funding-news page says the platform "can integrate with electronic health records," and the vendor's home page names no EHR.

Navina sells to primary care groups, such as the Privia Health and Agilon Health logos on its homepage. The homepage names athenahealth, Epic and Veradigm, and the vendor says 20,000+ clinicians and care team members use it. A device clinic watching implant alerts and a primary care group working an attributed population are not weighing these two against each other.

Decision support · Reviewed November 2, 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.

Navina logo

Navina

by Navina · founded 2018

AI copilot for chart review, risk adjustment and care gaps in primary care and value-based care groups.

When to pick each one

Implicity

  • Remote monitoring of pacemakers, ICDs and loop recorders
  • Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, MicroPort devices
  • Three FDA 510(k) numbers on openFDA
Read the full Implicity review

Navina

  • Privia Health and Agilon Health among customers
  • Care-gap closure alongside risk adjustment
Read the full Navina review

Score

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

Implicity

36of 100

Competitive

Navina

36of 100

Competitive
Score by dimension for Implicity and Navina
DimensionImplicityNavinaDifference
FDA clearance12 / 120 / 12+12
HIPAA / SOC2 / BAA0 / 1010 / 10-10
EHR integrations (count)0 / 5.61.7 / 5.6-1.7
Top-3 EHR coverage (Epic / Oracle / Athena)0 / 4.83.4 / 4.8-3.4
Bidirectional write-back0 / 1.20 / 1.20
Peer-reviewed papers8.4 / 210 / 21+8.4
RCT / meta-analysis / systematic review0 / 90 / 90
Funding & adoption signal3 / 128.4 / 12-5.4
Pricing transparency1.3 / 2.51.3 / 2.50
Years in market6 / 66 / 60

Scroll horizontally to see every column.

How scores are computed

Pricing

Implicity

TierMonthlyAnnualNotes
Enterprisen/an/aNo public price.

Navina

TierMonthlyAnnualNotes
Enterprisen/an/aNo public price.

Evidence

Implicity

FDA decisions

Peer-reviewed

1 PubMed record names Implicity.

Navina

FDA decisions

No FDA decision cited in our research as of November 2, 2026.

Compliance and integrations

Documented from each vendor’s own pages.

SpecImplicityNavina
Free tierNo / unverifiedNo / unverified
HIPAANo / unverifiedYes
SOC 2 Type IINo / unverifiedYes
EHR integrationsNot specifiedathenahealth, Epic, Veradigm
Founded20162018
HQFRn/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.