Healthcare · head to head
Gleamer vs Rad AI
Gleamer
Healthcare
CE marked and FDA cleared imaging AI suite for bone trauma and chest, now owned by RadNet
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
Rad AI
Healthcare
Generative reporting and follow-up tracking for radiology, positioned outside the diagnostic device boundary
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: Gleamer radNet, an imaging provider that competes with many independent Gleamer customers, now owns the company and also owns the competing DeepHealth AI portfolio, so roadmap and pricing priorities are an open question for non-RadNet buyers.; Rad AI the products are not FDA cleared devices and are not intended to be, so any claim that Rad AI improves diagnostic accuracy is unsupported; what has been measured is reporting speed and follow-up completion, not detection.
- They diverge on capability: Gleamer covers BoneView, Rad AI covers Impressions.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Gleamer and Rad AI actually diverge.
Identical on both: starting price (On request), pricing model (quote), free tier (No), 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 Gleamer
- BoneView
- ChestView
- BoneAge
- BoneMetrics
- LungCT and BoneCT
- BreastView
- Pixyl.Neuro
- Gleamer Copilot
Only in Rad AI
- Impressions
- Reporting
- Continuity
- Style learning
- Omni Reconcile
- PACS and dictation embedding
- Patient outreach workflows
- Audit reporting
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Gleamer
- An emergency department where junior doctors read plain films before radiology review and missed fractures are a recurring incident themenot Rad AI
- An urgent care network standardising musculoskeletal reading quality across sites with variable radiology covernot Rad AI
- A paediatric service automating bone age assessment to remove a slow manual atlas comparisonnot Rad AI
- An orthopaedic service that needs automated limb alignment and measurement before surgical planning rather than manual measurement on the workstationnot Rad AI
Rad AI
- A private radiology practice whose read volume has grown faster than it can recruit and that wants dictation time per study reduced without changing PACSnot Gleamer
- A health system losing revenue and exposing itself to liability because recommended follow-up imaging on incidental findings is never bookednot Gleamer
- A radiology department standardising impression quality across a mixed group of employed and locum radiologistsnot Gleamer
- A group deploying an AI tool that must not trigger a device validation programme, because governance capacity is already consumed by a triage algorithm rolloutnot Gleamer
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Gleamer
- RadNet, an imaging provider that competes with many independent Gleamer customers, now owns the company and also owns the competing DeepHealth AI portfolio, so roadmap and pricing priorities are an open question for non-RadNet buyers.
- The measured benefit is largest for less experienced readers, so a specialist musculoskeletal service will see far less improvement than the published reader studies suggest.
- Cleared indications differ per module and per market, and the FDA cleared set is narrower than the CE marked European set, so an American buyer cannot rely on European reference sites.
- Each additional module adds alert volume into the same worklist, and departments running several Gleamer algorithms report needing local threshold tuning to keep radiologist trust.
- Pricing is per exam and not published, which makes budgeting difficult for an emergency department whose plain film volume swings seasonally.
Rad AI
- The products are not FDA cleared devices and are not intended to be, so any claim that Rad AI improves diagnostic accuracy is unsupported; what has been measured is reporting speed and follow-up completion, not detection.
- Generated impressions require radiologist review and signature, so the time saving evaporates in any group whose radiologists rewrite the draft rather than edit it, and adoption varies sharply by individual.
- It is bound to your dictation platform, so a group planning to move off PowerScribe should sequence that decision first or expect to redo the Rad AI integration.
- Continuity depends on the quality of recommendation language in historical reports, and departments with inconsistent phrasing get poor recall until reporting practice is standardised.
- Pricing is not published and is structured per radiologist or per study depending on the product mix, which makes it hard to compare against image-analysis AI vendors that price per scan.
Pricing, plan by plan
Gleamer
On request- Gleamer Copilot$undefined/year
- Priced per exam analysed or as an annual volume subscription
- Modules licensed individually or bundled as Copilot
- Cleared and CE marked indication differs per module and per market
Rad AI
On request- Rad AI platform$undefined/year
- Priced per radiologist or per study volume depending on product and contract
- Impressions, Reporting and Continuity licensed separately
- Annual subscription with implementation and integration scoped per site
Which should you pick?
Choose Gleamer if
- You need boneview.
- You work on Web, Cloud, On-premise.
- You also want chestview.
Choose Rad AI if
- You need impressions.
- You work on Windows, Web, Cloud.
- You also want reporting.
Questions people ask
- Is Gleamer or Rad AI better?
- Neither clearly leads. Gleamer starts at On request and Rad AI at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Gleamer or Rad AI?
- Gleamer starts at On request and Rad AI at On request.
- Does Gleamer or Rad AI run on more platforms?
- Gleamer runs on Web, Cloud, On-premise. Rad AI runs on Windows, Web, Cloud.
- What is Gleamer best used for?
- Gleamer is most often used for an emergency department where junior doctors read plain films before radiology review and missed fractures are a recurring incident theme, an urgent care network standardising musculoskeletal reading quality across sites with variable radiology cover, a paediatric service automating bone age assessment to remove a slow manual atlas comparison, an orthopaedic service that needs automated limb alignment and measurement before surgical planning rather than manual measurement on the workstation. Of those, an emergency department where junior doctors read plain films before radiology review and missed fractures are a recurring incident theme and an urgent care network standardising musculoskeletal reading quality across sites with variable radiology cover are not what Rad AI is typically brought in for.
- What can Gleamer do that Rad AI cannot?
- Gleamer covers BoneView, ChestView, BoneAge, BoneMetrics. Rad AI covers Impressions, Reporting, Continuity, Style learning.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Gleamer: Who owns Gleamer?
RadNet agreed to acquire Gleamer in February 2026 for around two hundred and fifteen million euros upfront. RadNet also owns DeepHealth, a competing AI portfolio.
Rad AI: Is Rad AI FDA cleared?
No, and by design. The products draft text and manage follow-up workflow rather than interpreting images, so they fall outside the device pathway. Treat any diagnostic accuracy claim with scepticism.
Gleamer: Is BoneView FDA cleared?
Yes, BoneView holds 510(k) clearance including for paediatric fracture detection, but the cleared finding set is narrower than the CE marked indication in Europe.
Rad AI: Does the radiologist still sign the report?
Yes. Output is a draft that the radiologist reviews and signs; nothing is released autonomously.
Gleamer: What does the evidence actually show?
Multi-reader studies reported improved reader sensitivity for fracture detection and fewer false negatives, with the gain concentrated among less experienced readers in emergency settings.
Rad AI: Which product actually pays for itself?
Continuity has the clearest financial case, because recommended follow-up imaging that gets completed is billable work that currently does not happen.
Gleamer: Can I buy just BoneView?
Yes, modules are licensed individually, though the commercial pitch is now the Copilot bundle across modalities.
Rad AI: Will it work with our dictation system?
It is deepest with Nuance PowerScribe. Confirm your specific dictation and PACS combination before contracting, because integration depth is the main deployment variable.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- Gleamer vs Annalise.ai
- Gleamer vs Sectra
- Gleamer vs Lunit
- Gleamer vs Techcyte
- Gleamer vs Philips IntelliSpace PACS
- Gleamer vs Visage Imaging
- Gleamer vs Paige
- Gleamer vs Therapixel
- Gleamer vs Fujifilm Synapse
- Gleamer vs Ibex Medical Analytics
- Gleamer vs Hinge Health
- Gleamer vs Meru Health
- Gleamer vs NextGen Healthcare
- Gleamer vs Nookal
- Gleamer vs Open Dental
- Gleamer vs Oracle Clinical One
- Gleamer vs Phreesia
- Gleamer vs Cerner PowerChart
- Gleamer vs Clue
- Gleamer vs Flo
- Gleamer vs Koa Health
- Gleamer vs Quantum Health
- Gleamer vs TherapyNotes
- Gleamer vs Zocdoc
- Gleamer vs Allscripts Professional EHR
- Rad AI vs Annalise.ai
- Rad AI vs Sectra
- Rad AI vs Lunit
- Rad AI vs Techcyte
- Rad AI vs Philips IntelliSpace PACS
- Rad AI vs Visage Imaging
- Rad AI vs Paige
- Rad AI vs Therapixel
- Rad AI vs Fujifilm Synapse
- Rad AI vs Ibex Medical Analytics
- Rad AI vs Hinge Health
- Rad AI vs Meru Health
- Rad AI vs NextGen Healthcare
- Rad AI vs Nookal
- Rad AI vs Open Dental
- Rad AI vs Oracle Clinical One
- Rad AI vs Phreesia
- Rad AI vs Cerner PowerChart
- Rad AI vs Clue
- Rad AI vs Flo
- Rad AI vs Koa Health
- Rad AI vs Quantum Health
- Rad AI vs TherapyNotes
- Rad AI vs Zocdoc
- Rad AI vs Allscripts Professional EHR