MedAI Verdict
All comparisons

PaceMate vs Regard

The customers on Regard's homepage are health systems, among them Banner Health, WakeMed and Kettering Health. The platform reads the whole chart, recommends diagnoses with an evidence chain and drafts the note, and its technology page says no diagnostic logic reaches patients without physician approval. Because it also covers HCC capture and denial prevention, the revenue-cycle office joins the clinical buyers. Its ONC 2015 Cures Update certification dates from May 2024. Results such as Sentara's 17% rise in CC/MCC capture are the vendor's own case studies.

PaceMate serves cardiology device clinics. The vendor says Auto-Script writes a preliminary report for remote monitoring codes CPT 93294 to 93298 and saves 70% of documentation time. The security page states ISO/IEC 27001:2022, HITRUST r2, SOC 2 Type 2 and SOC 3, with hosting on AWS.

Regard's pages speak to health systems and their diagnosis, note and coding work. PaceMate's speak to the remote alert queue of a cardiac device clinic.

Decision support · Reviewed November 2, 2026

PaceMate logo

PaceMate

by PaceMate

Cardiac device remote monitoring platform whose Auto-Triage ranks device alerts by clinical priority for device clinics.

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

PaceMate

  • ISO 27001, HITRUST r2 and SOC 2 Type 2
  • Vendor says Auto-Script drafts CPT 93294 to 93298 reports
Read the full PaceMate review

Regard

  • ONC Cures Update certified, May 2024
  • Reads the whole chart to recommend diagnoses
  • Covers HCC capture and denial prevention
Read the full Regard review

Score

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

PaceMate

47of 100

Solid choice

Regard

9of 100

Tracked
Score by dimension for PaceMate and Regard
DimensionPaceMateRegardDifference
FDA clearance0 / 120 / 120
HIPAA / SOC2 / BAA10 / 100 / 10+10
EHR integrations (count)1.7 / 5.61.7 / 5.60
Top-3 EHR coverage (Epic / Oracle / Athena)4.8 / 4.81.9 / 4.8+2.9
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 market0 / 60 / 60

Scroll horizontally to see every column.

How scores are computed

Pricing

PaceMate

TierMonthlyAnnualNotes
Enterprisen/an/aNo public price.

Regard

TierMonthlyAnnualNotes
Enterprisen/an/aNo public price.

Evidence

Regard

FDA decisions

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

Compliance and integrations

Documented from each vendor’s own pages.

SpecPaceMateRegard
Free tierNo / unverifiedNo / unverified
HIPAAYesNo / unverified
SOC 2 Type IIYesNo / unverified
EHR integrationsEpic, Oracle Health, athenahealthEpic
Foundedn/an/a
HQn/an/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.