Softwr

Healthcare · head to head

Aidoc vs Signant Health

Aidoc logo

Aidoc

Healthcare

FDA cleared radiology AI for triage and notification of time critical findings

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Signant Health logo

Signant Health

Healthcare

eCOA-first clinical trial platform that has grown outward into EDC, eConsent and televisits

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Aidoc the clearances are for triage and notification in the CADt category, so the software may reorder a worklist but may not deliver a diagnosis or replace a read, and business cases built on reduced radiologist workload do not survive contact with the regulatory wording.; Signant Health no pricing is published, and the software licence is a minority of the real bill once instrument licensing, translations, device provisioning and services are added, so early budget estimates are routinely too low.
  • They diverge on capability: Aidoc covers Triage and notification, Signant Health covers eCOA and ePRO.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Aidoc and Signant Health actually diverge.

Attributes where Aidoc and Signant Health differ
AttributeAidocSignant Health

Identical on both: starting price (On request), pricing model (quote), free tier (No), platforms (Web, iOS, Android), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Healthcare).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Aidoc

  • Triage and notification
  • Intracranial haemorrhage
  • Pulmonary embolism
  • Large vessel occlusion
  • Pneumothorax on X-ray
  • aiOS platform
  • Clinical workflow notifications

Only in Signant Health

  • eCOA and ePRO
  • Unified platform
  • eConsent
  • Randomisation and supplies
  • TeleVisits
  • Rater training
  • Data surveillance
  • Instrument library

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Aidoc

  • A regional stroke centre that wants large vessel occlusion flagged and the neurointervention team notified before the radiologist dictatesnot Signant Health
  • A trauma centre wanting cervical spine fracture and intra abdominal free gas prioritised in an overnight queue read by one on call radiologistnot Signant Health
  • An oncology imaging programme that wants incidental pulmonary embolism caught on staging CTs ordered for a different questionnot Signant Health
  • A health system that has bought AI from several vendors and wants one PACS integration through aiOS rather than one integration per algorithmnot Signant Health

Signant Health

  • A central nervous system or psychiatry trial where the primary endpoint is a rated scale and rater consistency decides the readoutnot Aidoc
  • A global study needing an outcome instrument translated and linguistically validated across a dozen languagesnot Aidoc
  • A decentralised or hybrid protocol combining televisits, eConsent and at-home patient reported outcomesnot Aidoc
  • A sponsor consolidating separate eCOA, eConsent and randomisation vendors onto one platform to cut reconciliation worknot Aidoc

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Aidoc

  • The clearances are for triage and notification in the CADt category, so the software may reorder a worklist but may not deliver a diagnosis or replace a read, and business cases built on reduced radiologist workload do not survive contact with the regulatory wording.
  • Triage algorithms are tuned for sensitivity, so false positives are routine, and each one interrupts a radiologist. Sites that do not measure positive predictive value in their own case mix see clinician trust erode within months.
  • Pricing is per algorithm and per study volume with no published rate card, so the cost of a multi algorithm deployment escalates sharply and cannot be benchmarked before a sales conversation.
  • The clinical benefit accrues to stroke, trauma and cardiology service lines while the cost usually lands in the radiology or IT budget, which makes internal funding harder than the return on investment slides suggest.
  • Performance depends on scanner protocols and reconstruction settings, so results validated at one site do not transfer, and each deployment needs local validation work that is rarely budgeted for.

Signant Health

  • No pricing is published, and the software licence is a minority of the real bill once instrument licensing, translations, device provisioning and services are added, so early budget estimates are routinely too low.
  • Linguistic validation is charged per instrument per language and is on the critical path to first patient in, so adding a country late in start-up produces both a cost and a schedule hit.
  • Provisioned participant devices bring logistics, replacement, shipping and cellular connectivity obligations that persist for the life of the trial and are frequently underestimated.
  • The EDC component is newer than the eCOA heritage, so sponsors with complex data management requirements often keep an incumbent EDC and lose the single-database benefit that justifies the platform.
  • It is priced and scoped for sponsor-grade trials, which makes it a poor fit for investigator-initiated or academic studies that need outcome collection without the services layer.

Pricing, plan by plan

Aidoc

On request
  • Aidoc$undefined/year
    • Annual subscription priced by algorithm and by study volume
    • aiOS platform integration licensed separately from individual algorithms
    • Multi algorithm bundles negotiated for enterprise deployments

Signant Health

On request
  • SmartSignals Unified Platform$undefined/year
    • Priced per study through a sales process
    • Modules selected per protocol: EDC, eCOA, randomisation, eConsent, TeleVisits
    • Instrument licensing paid to scale owners on top of platform cost

Which should you pick?

Choose Aidoc if

  • You need triage and notification.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want intracranial haemorrhage.
Aidoc review

Choose Signant Health if

  • You need ecoa and epro.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want unified platform.
Signant Health review

Questions people ask

Is Aidoc or Signant Health better?
Neither clearly leads. Aidoc starts at On request and Signant Health at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Aidoc or Signant Health?
Aidoc starts at On request and Signant Health at On request.
Does Aidoc or Signant Health run on more platforms?
Both run on Web, iOS, Android, so platform support will not decide this one for you.
What is Aidoc best used for?
Aidoc is most often used for a regional stroke centre that wants large vessel occlusion flagged and the neurointervention team notified before the radiologist dictates, a trauma centre wanting cervical spine fracture and intra abdominal free gas prioritised in an overnight queue read by one on call radiologist, an oncology imaging programme that wants incidental pulmonary embolism caught on staging cts ordered for a different question, a health system that has bought ai from several vendors and wants one pacs integration through aios rather than one integration per algorithm. Of those, a regional stroke centre that wants large vessel occlusion flagged and the neurointervention team notified before the radiologist dictates and a trauma centre wanting cervical spine fracture and intra abdominal free gas prioritised in an overnight queue read by one on call radiologist are not what Signant Health is typically brought in for.
What can Aidoc do that Signant Health cannot?
Aidoc covers Triage and notification, Intracranial haemorrhage, Pulmonary embolism, Large vessel occlusion. Signant Health covers eCOA and ePRO, Unified platform, eConsent, Randomisation and supplies.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Aidoc: Is Aidoc FDA cleared?

Yes, it holds multiple 510(k) clearances, but they are for computer aided triage and notification. It may prioritise a worklist and notify a team. It may not provide a diagnostic interpretation or replace a radiologist read.

Signant Health: What is Signant best at?

Electronic clinical outcome assessment, particularly rated scales in central nervous system and psychiatry trials, together with rater training and endpoint quality services.

Aidoc: Does it reduce radiologist workload?

No. Every study still needs a full read. The benefit is in the order studies are read and how quickly a receiving specialty is activated, not in reading fewer studies.

Signant Health: Is pricing published?

No. Everything is quoted per study, and instrument licences, translations and devices sit on top of the platform cost.

Aidoc: Can I run other vendors AI through it?

Yes, that is what the aiOS platform layer is for, and for health systems with several AI vendors it is often the main reason to buy Aidoc at all.

Signant Health: Can I use it only for eCOA?

Yes. The modules are selected per protocol, and many sponsors take eCOA and eConsent while keeping an existing EDC.

Aidoc: Is pricing published?

No. It is quoted per algorithm and by annual study volume, and enterprise bundles are negotiated case by case.

Signant Health: What drives the timeline?

Translation and linguistic validation of outcome instruments, which is per language per instrument and sits on the critical path to study start.

Share

Related pages

More on Aidoc

More on Signant Health

Keep looking

Other head to heads