AI medical scribes for fertility clinics, compared (2026)

Last checked: 31 August 2026. Vendors change fast; tell us if something here is out of date and we will correct it.

Every factual statement below about another company comes from that company's own public pages, fetched on the date above and linked in the references. Where a vendor does not state something publicly, the entry says not stated publicly — it does not say "no". A missing answer on a marketing site is a missing answer, not a missing capability, and several of these companies will happily tell you in a call what they have not put on a page.

We build one of the products in this table — the AI medical scribe for fertility clinics — so read the last row with that in mind. It is also the reason the table has an "ask us" in it rather than an optimistic guess.

What this compares on, and what it ignores

Most scribe comparisons rank on note quality, specialty count and price. Those are reasonable for a multi-specialty group and close to useless for a fertility practice, where the documentation problem has a particular shape: a lot of it is not a consultation, and the parts that are consultations turn on cycle context that a generalist has no reason to model.

So the dimensions here are:

• Fertility vocabulary and cycle context — does the vendor publicly claim anything about reproductive medicine specifically?
• Referral OCR — does it read an incoming fax or scan into a structured record?
• Call and message capture — does it document anything outside the room?
• EMR write-back — which systems, named?
• Clinician review model — what the vendor says about who signs.
• Data residency — Canada, US, EU.
• Consent handling — what the vendor states.
• Pricing transparency — is a number published?

Note quality is deliberately absent. Nobody can compare it honestly from public pages, and every vendor's own evaluation says they win.

The table

Reading the table honestly

Every "not stated publicly" in the fertility column is doing real work. None of these vendors claims fertility-specific cycle logic on its public pages, and that is not the same as none of them handling a fertility consultation well. A general ambient scribe drafting a new-patient REI consultation is drafting a conversation, which is what it is good at. The gap opens at the monitoring visit and outside the room.

Heidi is the only one of the six that publicly puts its name to fertility. It published a customer story in March 2026 from Dr. Jenna McCarthy, a board-certified reproductive endocrinologist at IVFMD, quoting "probably five to ten minutes per consult"[6]. That is a real fertility clinician on the record, which is more than most of this list has, and more than we have published.

Freed is the only one with a published price. Starter at $39/mo, Core at $79/mo, Premier at $104/mo billed annually or $119/mo monthly, Groups on request, with a seven-day trial[4]. A solo practice can decide about Freed on a Tuesday afternoon without talking to anyone, which is a real advantage over every other row including ours.

Freed is also the most specific about data handling of anyone here. "All data is stored within the United States"; SOC 2 Type 2; BAAs signed; "Audio recordings are temporarily saved in a secure and HIPAA-compliant manner until note summaries and quality checks are complete — then they are automatically deleted"; "AI is only trained on de-identified notes"[5]. Those four sentences answer more of a Canadian or US clinic's procurement questionnaire than most of this table does.

Heidi is the only one to publish a Canadian data-residency answer. "For Canadian users, patient data is hosted on cloud infrastructure located in Quebec", alongside PIPEDA and provincial privacy compliance[8]. For an Ontario clinic weighing PHIPA obligations, that is a meaningful, checkable statement.

Nabla and Suki name the most EMRs. Nabla lists Epic, athenahealth, Oracle, NextGen, Arya EHR and Greenway Health[9]; Suki claims "deep, real-time integrations with the four leading EHRs — Epic, Oracle Health, athenahealth, and MEDITECH"[10]. If your clinic runs one of those and integration depth is the deciding factor, that is where to start.

Abridge and Microsoft bring scale. Abridge publishes SOC 2 Type 1 and Type 2, HIPAA, CCPA and TX-RAMP in its trust centre[2] and says it is used across "over 40 specialties"[1]. Dragon Copilot is embedded in Epic, is available to physicians in ten countries, and captures "multi-party, multilingual conversations and orders at the point of care, or through on-demand recordings any time"[3]. Neither of those is a small thing to compete with, and a large health system already standardised on Epic or Nuance has a good reason not to add a seventh vendor.

Where we are weaker. We publish no price, we name no EMR integration, and we publish no fertility customer story. Two of those are things we are working on and one is a decision. None of them should be read as coyness — the honest position is that a clinic evaluating us today has less to check independently than a clinic evaluating Freed does.

Why the fertility columns are mostly empty

Three of the eight dimensions above — referral OCR, calls and messages, and cycle context — are blank for every vendor but us, and it is worth saying why rather than treating it as a scoreboard.

These companies are not failing at fertility. They are succeeding at a different problem. The ambient scribe market was built around the encounter that dominates primary care, hospital medicine and most specialties: a patient talks, a clinician reasons, a note follows. Optimising that encounter across a hundred specialties is a large, valuable and genuinely hard business, and it is the one Abridge, Nuance, Suki and Nabla are in.

A fertility practice's documentation is differently distributed. A patient in a stimulation cycle generates one consultation and then five or six monitoring visits, a stack of nurse calls, and a run of portal messages — plus the referral that started it, which somebody typed in by hand before she existed in the record at all. A scribe that documents the consultation perfectly has covered the smallest pile.

That is the whole argument for a fertility-specific product, and it is an argument about distribution of work, not about model quality. If your practice's documentation genuinely is consultation-shaped, pick from the first six rows on price, integration and residency, and you will do fine.

How to use this table

1. Start with residency and consent, not features. If your clinic is in Ontario, a vendor that cannot tell you where the audio lives is not yet a candidate, whatever the note quality. Ontario's IPC guidance on AI scribes is the right document to procure against.
2. Then EMR. If you run Epic or athenahealth, several of these have named, published integrations. If you run a fertility-specific system, ask every vendor on this list — including us — what they actually do with it, and treat a vague answer as a no.
3. Then count your week. Consults, monitoring visits, referrals, calls, messages. The answer tells you whether a consultation scribe is a solution or a partial one.
4. Then trial two, on your own recordings. Not a scripted demo. Five real de-identified encounters, reviewed by the clinician who would actually sign them, timed.

Corrections

If you work at one of these companies and something here is wrong or out of date, tell us and we will fix it and note the change. Everything above is sourced to a page we can link; if you have published a better answer since 31 August 2026, we would rather cite that.

Test the last row: book a demo of the AI medical scribe for fertility clinics with your own de-identified referrals and call recordings, and see which of the "ask us" cells matter to you.

References

All fetched 31 August 2026.

• [1] Abridge — Ambient AI for Clinicians
• [2] Abridge Trust Center
• [3] Microsoft Dragon Copilot
• [4] Freed — Pricing
• [5] Freed — Security and Privacy
• [6] Heidi — How Dr. Jenna McCarthy brought presence back to fertility care (17 March 2026)
• [7] Heidi — Pricing
• [8] Heidi — Canada compliance
• [9] Nabla — Ambient AI for Clinical Documentation & EHR
• [10] Suki
• AI Scribes: Key Considerations for the Health Sector — Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario (28 January 2026)

Related:

• Ambient AI scribe or dictation: what changes for a fertility practice
• What an AI scribe has to get right at an IVF monitoring visit

Sergei Gorlovetsky, CEO, Fertiligent