MedAI Verdict
All comparisons

SimpleSense vs Regard

A documentation or revenue-cycle team at a hospital is Regard's buyer. The vendor says it reads 100% of the chart and that every condition identified comes with an evidence chain, and that no diagnostic logic reaches patients without physician approval. Its solutions include HCC capture and a mid-revenue-cycle product for missed diagnoses before denials. The ONC certification, for "Regard SaaS Solution v.1" under 2015 Cures Update criteria, is dated May 2, 2024.

Nanowear's blood pressure product rests on a prospective 303-subject, four-week study by Nanowear authors with internal validation only, and the authors ask for external validation. Funding figures for the Brooklyn company conflict. Tracxn lists USD 1.52M over two rounds, ZoomInfo says under USD 5M over two rounds, and MobiHealthNews reported USD 1.5M in September 2014. A heart failure or cardiology clinic wanting patients in a sensor garment at home is Nanowear's buyer, which leaves no purchaser common to both tools.

Decision support · Reviewed November 2, 2026

SimpleSense logo

SimpleSense

by Nanowear · founded 2014

Cloth wearable with 510(k) cleared AI cloud analytics for remote cardiac monitoring and cuffless blood pressure.

Regard logo

Regard

by Regard

AI platform that reviews the full EHR chart, suggests supported diagnoses with evidence, and drafts clinical notes for physician approval.

When to pick each one

SimpleSense

  • Cuffless blood pressure study of 303 subjects
  • Cloth garment feeding heart failure analytics at home
Read the full SimpleSense review

Regard

  • Vendor says it reads the full chart, Epic FHIR demo
  • ONC 2015 Cures Update certification from May 2024
  • Covers HCC capture and denial prevention
Read the full Regard review

Score

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

SimpleSense

49of 100

Solid choice

Regard

9of 100

Tracked
Score by dimension for SimpleSense and Regard
DimensionSimpleSenseRegardDifference
FDA clearance12 / 120 / 12+12
HIPAA / SOC2 / BAA0 / 100 / 100
EHR integrations (count)0 / 5.61.7 / 5.6-1.7
Top-3 EHR coverage (Epic / Oracle / Athena)0 / 4.81.9 / 4.8-1.9
Bidirectional write-back0 / 1.20 / 1.20
Peer-reviewed papers14.7 / 210 / 21+14.7
RCT / meta-analysis / systematic review4.5 / 90 / 9+4.5
Funding & adoption signal3 / 123 / 120
Pricing transparency1.3 / 2.51.3 / 2.50
Years in market6 / 60 / 6+6

Scroll horizontally to see every column.

How scores are computed

Pricing

SimpleSense

TierMonthlyAnnualNotes
Enterprisen/an/aNo public price.

Regard

TierMonthlyAnnualNotes
Enterprisen/an/aNo public price.

Compliance and integrations

Documented from each vendor’s own pages.

SpecSimpleSenseRegard
Free tierNo / unverifiedNo / unverified
HIPAANo / unverifiedNo / unverified
SOC 2 Type IINo / unverifiedNo / unverified
EHR integrationsNot specifiedEpic
Founded2014n/a
HQUSn/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.