What Does AI PHQ-9 Screening Cost? The Complete 2026 Mental Health Clinic Guide

AI PHQ-9 Screening cost in 2026 is one of the most opaque procurement questions in healthcare technology and one of the most consequential for clinic owners trying to budget for the year ahead. This guide cuts through the partial transparency and walks through what each modality actually costs, including the hidden costs most vendors don’t foreground.

A clinic owner sits at her desk with three vendor proposals.

The EHR-native option is included in your subscription. The MBC platform says contact us for a custom quote. The voice-AI vendor says pricing depends on your configuration. None of them answers the question she actually asked: what does this cost me, all in, across a year?

When she puts a sharper version of the question to each vendor what’s your published price? the EHR vendor sends a link. The MBC vendor offers a 45-minute discovery call. The voice-AI vendor asks how many patients she sees per month. By Friday, she has spent three hours on procurement calls and still cannot fill in a single line of a budget spreadsheet for next quarter.

This is what AI PHQ-9 pricing actually looks like in 2026. Not a clean comparison table waiting to be assembled, but a fragmented landscape in which some vendors publish prices, some don’t, all of them have hidden costs that aren’t on the published page, and every modality has a different cost structure that does not map cleanly onto the others.

This guide does the work that the procurement calls do not. It walks through actual subscription pricing where it is publicly disclosed, the cost structure where pricing is undisclosed, the hidden costs that vendors do not foreground, and the directional ROI framework a practice can use to evaluate which modality fits its specific profile.

This is a buyer’s guide, not a sales pitch. MedLaunch operates in one of the modalities discussed. The framing is honest about what is public, what is not, and what the cost question actually requires.

1. Why “What Does AI PHQ-9 Cost?” Doesn’t Have a Single Answer

The cost question is harder than it looks because the four PHQ-9 modalities have four genuinely different cost structures, not four different price points on the same scale.

Paper has zero licensing cost, no vendor relationship, no subscription, and substantial labor costs that scale with volume. EHR-native pre-visit digital has a published subscription that includes PHQ-9 alongside dozens of other features, making its incremental PHQ-9 cost effectively zero. Tablet platforms have hardware, integration, and per-encounter or enterprise pricing structures that don’t fit the per-clinician-per-month model. MBC platforms typically price per clinician, per patient, or by total platform tier, usually undisclosed publicly. Voice-administered AI is priced per clinician with implementation included.

Comparing these structures requires a cost concept that goes beyond subscription line items: total cost of ownership, including labor, integration, completion-gap loss, and clinical risk. The remainder of this post structures the cost analysis around TCO rather than subscription price.

There is one more thing worth saying upfront. Vendors who don’t publish pricing aren’t being evasive for the sake of it pricing in this space genuinely depends on clinic size, integration scope, and patient volume, and a flat published price would either be too high for solo practices or too low for multi-site organizations. The honest implication is that for some modalities, the only way to know the cost is to request a quote with the practice’s actual parameters specified.

2. Paper PHQ-9: The Cost Most Practices Underestimate

Paper PHQ-9 looks free. It is not free. The cost is just hidden in labor instead of subscription.

The visible cost

The PHQ-9 instrument is in the public domain. There is no licensing fee. Printing costs at any reasonable practice volume are measured in cents per administration. There is no vendor relationship, no Business Associate Agreement, no integration project. The visible cost line is effectively zero.

The hidden labor cost

Each paper PHQ-9 administration requires staff time across several steps: distributing the form to the patient, monitoring completion, retrieving the form, scoring it, routing it to the chart, and following up on illegibility or skipped items. Combined, this is typically 3-5 minutes of staff labor per administration, distributed across front desk, medical assistant, and clinician roles.

For a clinic running 1,000 patient encounters per month with PHQ-9 administered to 80% of them (a representative cadence in mental health and primary care depression-screening workflows), that is 800 administrations per month. At 4 minutes average labor per administration, that is approximately 53 hours per month of staff time. At a loaded labor rate of $25 per hour (front desk and medical assistant rates plus benefits and overhead), the hidden labor cost is approximately $1,325 per month.

This is the cost of paper PHQ-9 that does not appear on a vendor invoice. Scale it by patient volume: a 2,000-encounter practice produces $2,500-$3,000 per month in hidden labor; a 500-encounter practice produces around $700.

Other paper-specific costs

Illegibility and re-screening. A non-trivial fraction of paper forms come back with at least one item that cannot be scored. The form must be re-administered, scored later, or treated as incomplete. Each instance is additional labor.

Storage and retrieval. Paper forms must be filed and, in some practice models, retained for compliance purposes. Storage cost is small per form but cumulative.

Scoring error. Manual scoring introduces a small but non-zero error rate. The cost of a misscored PHQ-9 that crosses a severity threshold is hard to dollarize but real.

Alert latency cost. Most importantly, the alert latency cost of paper Q9, where a positive Question 9 response is identified after the patient has left the clinic, or after the consultation has begun, is a clinical-risk cost discussed in detail in §7.

The honest paper costs

Paper PHQ-9 is not a “free” baseline against which other modalities are added at cost. It is a roughly $700-$3,000-per-month operational cost, depending on practice volume, plus the alert-latency clinical risk. For practices comparing paper to digital alternatives, the right cost comparison is not “paper at $0 versus digital at $X”; it is “paper at $1,000+ in hidden labor versus digital at $X-1,000.”

3. EHR-Native Pre-Visit Digital: The Real Subscription Numbers

For practices already on a mental-health-focused EHR, the PHQ-9 subscription cost is effectively zero, but the EHR subscription itself is real, and the completion-rate ceiling on portal-based screening is the binding constraint.

Published pricing as of April 2026

SimplePractice. Solo practice plans: Starter $49/month, Essential $79/month, Plus $99/month. The Plus plan supports group practices with additional clinicians at $69-$74/month each, depending on practice size. PHQ-9 administration is included as part of the platform’s outcome measures functionality at no incremental cost. The AI Note Taker is available as a $35/month add-on.

TherapyNotes. Solo plan: $69/month for a single user. Group plan: $79/month for the first clinician plus $50/month for each additional clinician, with unlimited non-clinical users included. Enterprise (30+ clinicians) uses Group rates. PHQ-9 is included as part of the outcome measures functionality.

ICANotes. Tiered pricing is publicly listed, varies by user role, and practice configuration. The platform includes 150+ built-in clinical forms with real-time scoring and Q9 high-risk alerting.

These prices have been verified against vendor documentation and current third-party pricing aggregators as of April 2026. Pricing in this space changes; verify directly on each vendor’s site before committing.

What’s actually included

For practices already paying for these EHRs, PHQ-9 functionality is included rather than separately procured:

• Automated recurring PHQ-9 delivery via email or patient portal
• Automatic scoring against validated severity thresholds
• High-risk flag on positive Question 9 responses (typically with a patient-facing crisis-resources modal in some platforms, like SimplePractice)
• Longitudinal trend tracking visible in the client profile
• Native EHR integration (because the platform is the EHR)
• BAA is included in the subscription

The completion-rate caveat

The flat zero-incremental-cost framing obscures the binding cost: portal-based pre-visit PHQ-9 has documented completion rates between 15.5% and 32% in primary care studies, with significant demographic variation. A practice paying $99/month for SimplePractice Plus is paying nothing additional for PHQ-9 but is also receiving PHQ-9 data on a 20-30% subset of intended administrations.

The cost of that completion gap depends on what the practice is using the PHQ-9 for. For measurement-based-care reimbursement contracts, it is direct revenue lost. For clinical safety screening, it is a screening that didn’t happen. For practices running formal MBC, the completion gap may be the deciding factor that pushes them toward an additional modality (in-clinic backup, voice administration) rather than relying on portal-based screening alone.

The honest EHR-native cost

EHR-native PHQ-9 is the most cost-effective option for practices already on a competent mental-health EHR, provided the practice can absorb a 20-30% portal completion rate or has a fallback workflow for the 70-80% who don’t complete asynchronously. The total monthly cost is the EHR subscription itself ($49-$99 per clinician at SimplePractice, $69-$129 at TherapyNotes, depending on group size). PHQ-9 is genuinely included.

4. Tablet and Kiosk: Capital Expenditure Plus Operational Overhead

Tablet-based PHQ-9 administration has a cost structure unlike any other modality: subscription-plus-hardware-plus-operational-overhead, with the subscription portion typically undisclosed.

Phreesia and similar platforms

Phreesia, the most established tablet-based intake platform, prices at the practice level with enterprise contracts that depend on clinic size, intake volume, and the bundle of intake services purchased (PHQ-9 is one component of broader intake digitization). Public pricing is not disclosed; the typical procurement cycle involves a discovery call, a custom quote, and contract negotiation.

For practices not already using a tablet-based intake platform, the modality requires building one, which means evaluating Phreesia, Clearwave, or comparable enterprise-grade alternatives, each with similarly opaque pricing structures.

Hardware costs (for tablet deployments outside enterprise platforms)

For practices running their own tablet-based screening (not Phreesia-class) using something like an iPad with a HIPAA-compliant form vendor:

• Hardware acquisition: $300-$600 per tablet
• Replacement cycle: 2-3 years
• Charging stations and cases: $50-$100 per tablet
• Sanitization supplies: small but ongoing
• IT support, troubleshooting, theft/damage replacement: highly variable

For a 5-tablet deployment, hardware capital cost is typically $1,500-$3,000 upfront with $200-$400/month in operational overhead.

Integration costs

Most tablet platforms require integration with the practice’s EHR for the scored PHQ-9 result to flow into the patient’s chart. Some integrations are included in the platform subscription; others incur one-time setup fees commonly in the $1,000-$5,000 range for behavioral-health-EHR integrations.

The honest tablet cost

Tablet is operationally heavier than any other modality. For practices already running tablet-based intake, adding PHQ-9 is a configuration question with no incremental cost. For practices building tablet-based screening from scratch, the total first-year cost typically lands in the $5,000-$15,000+ range, depending on scale, with an ongoing monthly operational cost of several hundred dollars beyond the subscription. Tablet is rarely the lowest-cost modality but often the right modality for the right practice profile (high-volume primary care with established check-in workflow).

5. Measurement-Based-Care Platforms: The Unpriced Category

The MBC platform category NeuroFlow, Greenspace Health, Mirah, Blueprint, Owl Practice, is the most opaque pricing landscape in the AI PHQ-9 space.

What is publicly known

Almost none of the major MBC platform vendors publish pricing. Greenspace, Mirah, NeuroFlow, Blueprint, and Owl Practice all require direct conversation to obtain a quote. The reason is structural: these platforms are typically sold to multi-site practices, behavioral health organizations, and integrated care networks where pricing reflects the size of the deployment, the integration scope, the assessment library required (Mirah’s library exceeds 540 instruments; PHQ-9 is one of many), and the analytics and reporting depth.

What can be inferred from the broader market?

Industry conversations and procurement disclosures suggest typical MBC platform pricing falls in one of two structures: per-clinician-per-month (commonly observed in the $30-$80+ range, varying by tier) or per-patient-per-month (commonly observed in the $5-$20 range, varying by patient volume). Enterprise tiers often include implementation, training, dedicated account management, and BAA. Lower tiers may not include all of these.

These ranges are directional only and should be confirmed directly with any vendor under consideration. They are included here because some range information is more useful than no information, but a procurement decision should never be made on inferred pricing without vendor-confirmed quotes.

Integration and implementation

MBC platforms typically include implementation as part of the contract; these are not self-onboarding products. Implementation can range from weeks to months, depending on practice complexity. Integration with the practice’s EHR is usually part of the implementation. BAA is signed before patient data flows.

The honest MBC platform cost

For a multi-site behavioral health organization or large practice running formal measurement-based care across many clinicians and patients, MBC platforms are often the right answer at a cost-justifying scale. The published pricing data is minimal, but the procurement structure is well understood: request a quote with clinic size, integration scope, and assessment library specified, and expect implementation overhead in addition to the subscription. For solo practices and small groups, MBC platforms are typically over-scaled. The right answer at this scale is usually EHR-native PHQ-9 unless specific MBC requirements drive otherwise.

6. Voice-Administered AI: How MedLaunch Prices This Category

The voice-administered AI category is the newest and smallest in the 2026 PHQ-9 landscape. MedLaunch is the commercial vendor in this category targeted at outpatient mental health and psychiatry clinics.

MedLaunch’s pricing model

MedLaunch is priced per clinician per month. Specific pricing is configured to the practice’s size, integration scope, screening cadence, and Question 9 alert routing complexity. It is not a flat published rate, for the same structural reasons that apply to MBC platforms: pricing reflects deployment scope, and a single published rate would be either too high for solo practices or too low for multi-site organizations.

What is included at every tier:

• Implementation (EHR integration, alert routing configuration, severity tier setup, staff briefing) is included in the subscription, not a separate setup fee
• Business Associate Agreement signed before go-live, at every tier (not gated to enterprise)
• Real-time Q9 alert routing with configurable severity tiers
• EHR delivery of the scored result before consultation begins
• Audit logging of every alert, recipient, acknowledgment, and disposition
• Longitudinal trend tracking against the patient record
• Encrypted data flows (in transit and at rest), with audio not retained after scoring, and patient data not used for external AI model training

Why is pricing configured rather than published

Three operational realities drive this:

Practice size variation. A solo psychiatry practice screening 200 patients per month has a fundamentally different deployment profile from a 30-clinician multi-site mental health system screening 8,000 patients per month. Flat pricing fits neither well.

Integration scope variation. Some practices use a major EHR (Epic, Athena Health) where MedLaunch has established integration patterns. Others use specialty mental-health EHRs where the integration scope is variable. The deployment cost differs accordingly.

Alert protocol complexity. Practices have different Q9 alert protocols. A simple single-recipient routing differs in implementation effort from a multi-tier escalation pathway with severity-based response paths. Configured pricing reflects this.

How to obtain MedLaunch pricing

Practices interested in voice-administered AI PHQ-9 should request a quote with the following parameters specified: number of clinicians, monthly screening volume, current EHR, desired alert routing structure, and any specific clinical-protocol requirements. The procurement conversation typically takes 20-30 minutes and produces a configured quote within several business days.

The honest MedLaunch cost positioning

For outpatient mental health and psychiatry clinics where alert latency and completion-rate consistency are the dimensions that matter most, MedLaunch’s pricing is structured to be operationally absorbable when offset by the recovered admin labor (no front-desk distribute/collect/score), the elimination of the alert-latency clinical-risk cost, and the completion-rate improvement over portal-based modalities. The post does not specify a dollar figure because pricing is genuinely configured per practice. The right way to evaluate fit is a 20-minute pricing call with the practice’s parameters specified.

7. The Hidden Costs Every Modality Has That Vendors Don’t Discuss

This is the section that distinguishes this post from competitor pricing content. Every vendor’s pricing page focuses on the subscription line item. The actual cost a practice pays across a year, across a deployment lifecycle, includes a series of hidden costs that no vendor’s marketing material foregrounds.

Implementation time loss

Every modality has implementation overhead. Even “free” EHR-native PHQ-9 requires configuration time: setting up the recurring delivery cadence, configuring alert thresholds, and training staff on the new workflow. Vendor-implemented modalities (MedLaunch, MBC platforms) typically include the technical implementation in the subscription but still require the practice’s clinical leadership to make protocol decisions.

Realistic implementation time:

• EHR-native PHQ-9: 2-8 hours of practice administrator time
• Tablet deployment: 20-40 hours of practice administrator time + IT support
• MBC platform: typically 4-12 weeks of part-time clinical leadership engagement
• MedLaunch voice administration: typically 2-4 weeks elapsed time, with most of the technical work handled by MedLaunch end-to-end and clinical leadership engagement bound to protocol decisions and final review

The cost of this time is rarely tracked, but it is real.

Training overhead

Staff have to be trained on any new workflow. The training cost varies by modality:

• Paper: minimal training; the workflow is universally familiar
• EHR-native portal: low training overhead; staff already know the EHR
• Tablet: moderate training; new device handling and patient-facing workflow
• MBC platform: substantial training; the platform usually changes how clinicians document outcomes
• Voice administration: low training; workflow is largely transparent to staff because the AI handles the administration

Integration costs

Integration with the practice’s EHR is sometimes included and sometimes a separate one-time fee. Published TherapyNotes data suggests complex integrations can run $1,000-$5,000 in setup costs. MedLaunch includes EHR integration in the subscription. MBC platform integration is typically included in the implementation contract. Tablet integration costs vary by platform.

Completion-gap revenue and clinical risk

This is the cost most underestimated.

For pre-visit portal-based PHQ-9 with 15-32% completion rates: 70-85% of intended administrations don’t happen. For practices with measurement-based-care contracts that pay for documented PHQ-9 administration, this is direct revenue lost. For practices with USPSTF-aligned screening programs, this is screening compliance not achieved. For practices using PHQ-9 to detect depression in primary care, these cases not identified.

A 1,000-encounter-per-month practice with 80% intended PHQ-9 cadence and 25% portal completion is producing 200 documented PHQ-9 results per month rather than the 800 the cadence would imply. The 600-administration gap is the cost.

Alert-latency clinical risk

This is the hardest cost to quantify and the most important to surface.

A positive Q9 response that arrives in the clinician’s awareness 30 minutes after the patient has completed the form, because the form was scored later, the chart wasn’t opened until the consultation, or the patient had already left, is a clinical-risk event. The cost of this risk does not appear on any invoice. But it is real, and it is the reason the alert-latency dimension is heavily weighted in any clinical-safety procurement.

Vendor management overhead

Multi-vendor stacks (an EHR plus an MBC platform plus a tablet vendor plus a screening tool) have ongoing vendor management overhead: contracts, BAAs, billing reconciliation, integration troubleshooting, and version upgrades. Single-vendor platforms eliminate this, at the cost of feature breadth.

The honest TCO picture

When the hidden costs are included, the cheapest modality on subscription line is often not the cheapest modality on TCO. Paper appears free but costs $1,000-$3,000 per month in hidden labor at typical clinic volumes. EHR-native portal costs $50-$100 per clinician per month but produces 70-85% completion gaps that have direct revenue and clinical implications. MBC platforms are unpriced publicly but include implementation that competitors charge separately. Voice-administered AI is configured pricing that includes implementation, but produces real-time alerting and high completion in captive moments. The cost is offset by the recovery of items that the cheaper modalities give up.

The right evaluation is the total cost of ownership across all six dimensions. The wrong evaluation is comparing subscription line items in isolation.

8. The Directional ROI Framework

Specific dollar ROI math for AI PHQ-9 depends on a practice’s volume, staffing, patient population, payer mix, and clinical priorities. The right framework, rather than a specific number, is what travels across practice profiles.

The four cost dimensions to evaluate together

Subscription cost — the visible, line-item cost.

Admin labor cost — the hidden labor cost of administering, scoring, and routing screenings. Highest for paper, lowest for voice-administered AI.

Completion-gap cost — revenue lost to under-screening or clinical signal lost to incomplete data. Highest for asynchronous portal-based modalities, lowest for in-clinic captive-moment modalities.

Clinical-risk cost — the cost of alert latency on positive Q9 responses. Hardest to dollarize, but real and concentrated in modalities where alert latency is high.

The right ROI calculation evaluates all four together. A modality that wins on subscription cost but loses on admin labor and clinical risk is not the cheapest modality on TCO.

Profile-dependent ROI patterns

For a high-volume, measurement-based-care-obligated practice with a high Q9-positive rate: voice-administered AI’s pricing is often offset by recovered admin labor + completion-rate improvement + alert-latency risk reduction. The ROI math typically favors voice for this profile.

For a low-volume solo practice already on a competent EHR with engaged digital-native patients: the EHR-native PHQ-9 already in the subscription is typically cost-justified. Adding a separate vendor on top requires the additional value (alert routing, completion rate improvement) to outweigh the additional cost.

For a multi-site behavioral health organization running formal MBC across many clinicians, the MBC platform pricing is typically cost-justified by the cross-clinician outcome tracking, dashboard analytics, and standardized reporting that single-modality solutions don’t deliver. The ROI math typically favors an MBC platform at this scale.

For a primary care practice with an established tablet-based intake, tablet-based PHQ-9 added to the existing intake platform is typically the most cost-effective addition. Building a parallel modality on top of established tablet intake is usually unjustified.

What this means in practice

The right ROI question is not “which modality has the best ROI,” it is “which modality matches our profile, and does the cost work for us at our scale and volume.” The post does not specify dollar ROI numbers because the calculation depends on the practice’s specific parameters. Any vendor that offers a generic dollar ROI number across all clinic profiles is presenting marketing math, not procurement math.

9. How to Evaluate Any AI PHQ-9 Vendor’s Pricing

When approaching any vendor in this space, the questions that produce a usable cost picture are not generally the questions vendor sales teams expect.

Pricing structure questions

What is the pricing model per clinician, per patient, per screening, or flat platform fee? Each model produces different cost dynamics at different practice sizes. Per-clinician pricing scales linearly with provider count. Per-patient pricing scales with patient volume. Per-screening pricing scales with cadence. Flat platform pricing is predictable but may be over-scaled for small practices.

Is implementation included or a separate fee? Some vendors include implementation; others charge $1,000-$10,000+ for setup. Confirm which.

Is the BAA included at this tier or only at enterprise? Some vendors require an enterprise tier for BAA access. For HIPAA-covered entities, a BAA must be in place before patient data flows.

What is included in the subscription versus the add-on? Many vendors price the base subscription competitively, then add fees for AI features, advanced reminders, e-prescribing, claim submission, and so on. The all-in cost is what matters.

Contract and lifecycle questions

What is the minimum commitment or contract term? Monthly cancellation is different from an annual contract.

What is the price increase clause? Most vendors reserve the right to raise pricing annually. Knowing the cap (or the absence of a cap) matters.

What happens to my data if I cancel? Data export costs, retention timelines, and retrieval workflows differ across vendors.

Hidden-cost questions

What is the typical implementation timeline? Time-to-value differs by 10x across modalities measure it.

What ongoing training is required? Training overhead is rarely zero.

What integration costs apply to my EHR? Integration may be included or separate, depending on the EHR.

A 20-minute conversation that surfaces these answers produces a far better procurement outcome than a 60-minute demo that focuses on features.

10. Frequently Asked Questions

How much does AI PHQ-9 screening cost per month?

The honest answer is that it depends on the modality and the vendor. EHR-native PHQ-9 is included in EHR subscriptions like SimplePractice ($49-$99/clinician) and TherapyNotes ($69-$129+/clinician). MBC platforms (NeuroFlow, Mirah, Greenspace) typically price per clinician or per patient and do not publish pricing. Typical industry ranges are $30-$80+ per clinician per month, but vendor-confirmed quotes are required. Voice-administered AI from MedLaunch is priced per clinician with implementation included; specific pricing is configured per practice.

Is the paper PHQ-9 actually free?

No. The instrument itself is free (it is in the public domain), but the labor cost of administering, scoring, and routing paper forms is typically $700-$3,000 per month at common clinic volumes, depending on patient volume and screening cadence. Adding the alert-latency clinical-risk cost makes paper meaningfully more expensive than its zero-subscription appearance suggests.

Why don’t most AI PHQ-9 vendors publish pricing?

Pricing in this space genuinely depends on clinic size, integration scope, screening volume, and configuration complexity. A single flat published rate would either be too high for solo practices or too low for multi-site organizations. This is consistent with how most enterprise healthcare SaaS prices. The procurement model is request-a-quote with practice parameters specified.

What’s the cheapest modality?

For a practice already on a competent mental-health EHR (SimplePractice, TherapyNotes, ICANotes, Owl Practice), the EHR-native PHQ-9 is the cheapest because it’s included in the existing subscription. For a practice not already on such an EHR, the cost comparison depends on what the practice is replacing: paper, an MBC platform, a tablet system, or nothing. The cheapest modality on subscription is rarely the cheapest modality on total cost of ownership.

How does MedLaunch price its AI PHQ-9 screening?

MedLaunch prices voice-administered AI PHQ-9 per clinician per month, with implementation included (no separate setup fee) and a Business Associate Agreement signed at every tier. Specific pricing is configured to the practice’s size, integration scope, screening cadence, and alert routing complexity. Practices can request a quote with their parameters specified; configured pricing is typically returned within several business days.

What does “implementation included” actually include?

For MedLaunch, implementation includes EHR integration with the practice’s existing system, configuration of the screening cadence (per visit, per medication review, intake-only, or custom), Q9 alert routing setup with configurable severity tiers and escalation paths, audit logging configuration, staff briefing, and testing before go-live. The work is handled by MedLaunch’s implementation team end-to-end, with the practice’s clinical leadership engaged for protocol decisions.

What about hidden integration fees?

Integration with the practice’s EHR is included in MedLaunch’s subscription. For other vendors, integration costs may be separate from published TherapyNotes data; for example, it indicates complex EHR migrations can run $1,000-$5,000. Always confirm whether integration is included or separate before signing.

Can I cancel my AI PHQ-9 subscription if it doesn’t fit?

Cancellation terms vary by vendor. Most EHR-native subscriptions (SimplePractice, TherapyNotes) offer monthly cancellation. MBC platforms and enterprise contracts often have annual or multi-year minimums. MedLaunch’s contract terms are part of the configured procurement conversation.

What’s the ROI of switching from paper to AI voice administration?

ROI depends on the practice’s profile. For a high-volume practice with high admin burden + high Q9 positive rate + measurement-based-care obligations, the recovered admin labor + completion-rate improvement + alert-latency risk reduction typically more than offset the subscription cost. For a low-volume solo practice already managing paper administration efficiently, the ROI calculation may not favor switching. The right evaluation is profile-specific, not a generic dollar figure.

Are there discounts for solo practitioners or small practices?

This varies by vendor. SimplePractice, TherapyNotes, and ICANotes offer solo plans at lower price points than group plans. MBC platforms and voice-AI vendors typically configure pricing per practice rather than offering published solo discounts. The configured pricing for a solo practice should reflect its smaller scale. Always ask whether solo pricing is available.

11. Conclusion

The clinic owner sitting at her desk with three vendor proposals is asking the right question. What does this cost me, all in, across a year?

The honest answer in 2026 is that the cost of AI PHQ-9 screening is not a single number; it is a structure that varies by modality, vendor, and the practice’s specific profile. Some pricing is publicly disclosed: SimplePractice at $49-$99/clinician/month, TherapyNotes at $69-$129+/clinician/month, ICANotes on a published tier. Most other pricing is configured per-practice and requires direct conversation. Paper has zero subscription cost and substantial hidden labor cost. MBC platforms and voice-administered AI vendors typically price per clinician with implementation included, but specific figures require vendor-confirmed quotes.

What matters is total cost of ownership, not subscription line items. The hidden costs include implementation time, training overhead, integration fees, completion-gap revenue loss, alert-latency clinical risk, vendor management overhead, which frequently exceed the visible subscription cost. The cheapest modality on the line item is rarely the cheapest modality on TCO.

For most practices, the ROI calculation is profile-dependent. EHR-native PHQ-9 is the right answer for solo and small practices already on a competent EHR. Tablet is the right answer for primary care with established intake workflows. MBC platforms are the right answer for multi-site organizations running formal measurement-based care. Voice-administered AI is the right answer for outpatient mental health and psychiatry clinics where alert latency and completion-rate consistency are the dimensions that matter most.

The vendor that prices most transparently is not always the vendor that fits the practice best. The vendor that prices most opaquely is not always the vendor trying to obscure the cost. The right procurement move is to ask the right questions of each vendor, evaluate TCO across modalities, and match the cost structure to the practice profile.