Best AI PHQ-9 Tools in 2026: The Complete Buyer's Guide for Mental Health Clinics

A mental health clinic owner sits through six vendor demos in a single week.

The first one shows a beautifully designed patient app and tells her she’ll see “real-time symptom tracking.” The second one shows a tablet kiosk and tells her PHQ-9 will be done at check-in. The third shows an EHR-native form and tells her PHQ-9 is already there for free. The fourth shows ambient session AI and tells her PHQ-9 is the wrong tool entirely. The fifth shows voice-administered AI and tells her the screening can be done before the patient walks into the consultation room. The sixth tells her measurement-based care requires a 540-assessment library and an enterprise dashboard.

By Friday afternoon she has six different definitions of “AI PHQ-9 automation,” six different price points, and no clear way to decide.

This is what the category actually looks like in 2026. Not a single product type with a clear best-in-class winner, but a fragmented landscape of genuinely different solutions that all sit under the same search term. The right tool for one clinic is the wrong tool for the next. And most of the comparison content available online glosses over the structural differences and tries to rank tools side by side that are not actually doing the same thing.

This guide does the work the demo loop does not. It maps the entire 2026 landscape by modality, names the major commercial players in each category, lays out the seven criteria that actually matter when comparing them, and ends with a decision framework that matches tools to clinic profiles.

This is a buyer’s guide, not a sales pitch. MedLaunch makes one of the products discussed in Section 3. The framework comes first.

1. The 2026 PHQ-9 Automation Landscape: Five Modalities

The honest way to map this category is by modality, how the PHQ-9 actually reaches the patient and how the result reaches the clinician. Once you organize the field this way, the comparison becomes far cleaner.

Modality	What it is	Major commercial players
EHR-native digital forms	PHQ-9 is built into the practice’s existing EHR or practice management system, sent to the patient via email/text/portal, scored automatically	SimplePractice, TherapyNotes, ICANotes
Measurement-based-care platforms	Dedicated MBC infrastructure with PHQ-9 as one of many included instruments; designed for systematic outcome tracking across patients and providers	NeuroFlow, Greenspace Health, Mirah, Blueprint, Owl Practice
Tablet/kiosk in-clinic	PHQ-9 administered on a tablet during check-in, scored at the point of administration	Phreesia
Voice-administered AI	Patient completes the PHQ-9 by speaking with an AI voice assistant; score is calculated instantly and delivered to the clinician before the consultation	MedLaunch
Patient-app + clinician dashboard	Patient self-administers PHQ-9 on their own phone via a dedicated app, tied to a clinician-facing dashboard	NeuroFlow, Blueprint (overlaps with MBC platforms above)

Three observations about this map.

First, the categories overlap. NeuroFlow is both an MBC platform and a patient-app vendor. Blueprint pivoted from MBC platform to “AI-Assisted EHR.” Owl Practice is both an EHR and an MBC layer. Most of the named vendors do more than just PHQ-9. PHQ-9 is one of many instruments within a broader product. This is part of why direct comparison is hard.

Second, “AI” is doing a lot of marketing work. A scoring algorithm that adds nine integers is not artificial intelligence. Of the vendors named above, the genuinely AI-driven layer is concentrated in voice-administered systems and a smaller number of platforms using AI for trend analysis or risk stratification. Most of the rest are well-built digital forms with automated scoring.

Third, voice-administered AI is the smallest category. It is also the newest. As of mid-2026, the commercial footprint of active voice administration of the standard PHQ-9 is much smaller than the footprint of MBC platforms or EHR-native forms.

2. How to Evaluate Any AI PHQ-9 Tool: 7 Criteria That Matter

Before comparing vendors, a clinic needs criteria. Without them, every demo looks impressive and every tool looks like it solves the same problem.

These are the seven criteria that actually distinguish PHQ-9 automation tools from each other in 2026.

1. Administration modality

How does the patient actually encounter the PHQ-9? On a tablet at check-in? On their phone in an app the night before? In an email link 24 hours before the appointment? Speaking with an AI voice assistant in the waiting room?

This is the most important variable because it drives every other variable downstream. A patient who completes the PHQ-9 on their own phone the night before is having a different experience and producing different data than a patient who completes it during a 90-second waiting-room interaction.

2. Question 9 alert handling

PHQ-9 Question 9 asks about thoughts of being better off dead or hurting oneself. How the system handles a positive response is the single most clinically critical feature.

The relevant questions: When does the alert fire instantly upon submission, or when the clinician opens the chart? Who receives the alert: the assigned clinician only, or any covering clinical staff? Through what channel, in-app, SMS, EHR notification, or phone call? What is the expected response time? Can the alert routing be configured to match the clinic’s specific safety protocol?

3. EHR integration

Does the scored result land directly in the patient’s chart in the EHR the clinic already uses, or does it live in a separate dashboard the clinical team has to log into separately?

For most clinics, the answer to this question determines whether the tool actually integrates into the workflow or creates a parallel system the team has to maintain alongside their primary documentation.

4. Longitudinal tracking

Measurement-based care is not about a single PHQ-9 score. It is about tracking the trend across visits, improving, stable, or worsening, so treatment response is visible to the clinician and the patient.

Relevant questions: How easy is it to see a patient’s PHQ-9 trend across the last six visits? Is the trend visible in the EHR or only in a separate dashboard? Are previous scores stored persistently, or does the clinician have to chase historical data?

5. HIPAA / BAA stance

Any vendor processing patient data on behalf of a covered entity must sign a Business Associate Agreement. Some vendors require an enterprise tier to access a BAA. Some have well-documented HIPAA frameworks; some do not.

Relevant questions: Will the vendor sign a BAA at the price tier you are evaluating? Is patient data encrypted in transit and at rest? Is voice or chat data retained after the score is generated, and if so, under what policy? Is patient data used to train external AI models?

6. Patient effort required

How much friction is on the patient side? A PHQ-9 the patient ignores is a PHQ-9 that does not exist. Completion rates vary substantially across modalities.

The patterns: Email and portal-based PHQ-9 surveys have completion rates that depend heavily on patient engagement and reminder cadence. Tablet check-in screening has completion rates close to 100% for patients who present in person. Voice-administered AI in the waiting room has similarly high completion rates because the screening happens during a captive moment.

7. Clinical workflow disruption

How much does the tool change what the clinical team has to do?

A solution that requires the front desk to hand out tablets, monitor completion, and chase patients who didn’t finish is a different operational profile from a solution that runs in the background and delivers results before the consultation begins. A solution that requires the clinician to log into a separate dashboard to see the score is a different profile from one where the score appears in the chart they already opened for the visit.

3. The Tools, Modality by Modality

Honest descriptions of the major commercial players. Each section names what the tool actually does, who it’s built for, and where it fits in the landscape, not where it falls short relative to MedLaunch.

Tablet-Based: Phreesia

Phreesia is a patient-intake platform that has been digitizing the PHQ-9 since 2011. Its model is the wireless, touchscreen tablet handed to the patient at check-in, on which the PHQ-9 (along with other intake forms) is completed and automatically scored. The platform is licensed to administer the PHQ-9 through a separate agreement with Pfizer.

Phreesia’s strength is that it is purpose-built for the in-person check-in workflow, particularly in primary care and large medical groups. The PHQ-9 administration is one of dozens of intake-stage tasks the tablet handles. For practices already using Phreesia for intake, adding PHQ-9 screening is largely a configuration question, not a procurement one.

The honest fit: Phreesia is best for primary care practices, multi-specialty groups, and large medical organizations where check-in is the natural screening point. It is less commonly used in outpatient mental health, where the workflow is structured differently and the front desk is rarely the screening trigger.

Measurement-Based-Care Platforms

These are the platforms where PHQ-9 sits inside a broader MBC infrastructure. For practices serious about systematic outcome measurement across many clinicians or sites, this is the category that delivers the most.

NeuroFlow focuses on integrating behavioral health into primary care and other clinical settings. The model centers on identifying at-risk individuals through screening, triaging them, and supporting ongoing management through a patient-facing app that encourages self-reporting between visits. NeuroFlow developed its own Severity Score that combines PHQ-9, GAD-7, and other signals to support population-level risk stratification. Best fit: integrated behavioral-health-in-primary-care models, ACOs, and value-based care contracts where the platform’s analytics layer earns its keep.

Greenspace Health is a dedicated MBC platform built specifically for behavioral health providers. Its strength is translating assessment data into intuitive visual dashboards for clinicians and patients, with automated assessment delivery via desktop, mobile, text, or email. The platform supports both client self-administration and in-session staff administration. Greenspace also measures therapeutic alliance through proprietary instruments. Best fit: therapy-focused practices and behavioral health organizations that want measurement and dashboards, but already have scheduling and engagement systems in place.

Mirah operates at the enterprise level, serving large health systems and integrated care networks. Its library exceeds 540 validated assessments and supports systematic, scaled MBC across multiple sites with centralized oversight and advanced analytics. Best fit: multi-site organizations and large health systems with quality improvement initiatives and the staffing to use enterprise analytics.

Blueprint has shifted its positioning over time and now markets itself as an “AI-Assisted EHR for therapists.” It includes PHQ-9 and other standardized outcome measures alongside structured progress notes, treatment plan generation, and session-level data. Best fit: solo clinicians and small practices that want measurement-based care plus AI-assisted documentation in a single platform, particularly in insurance-heavy or outcomes-driven settings.

Owl Practice is an EHR plus MBC layer combined, with 85+ clinical assessments including PHQ-9, automatic scoring, and longitudinal tracking visible in the client profile. Measures can be sent via email or administered in session. Best fit: solo to mid-size therapy practices that want their EHR and MBC infrastructure in one platform.

EHR-Native Forms

For clinics already running their practice on a mental health EHR, the PHQ-9 is almost certainly already available as a built-in feature.

SimplePractice offers automatic recurring delivery of scored measures including PHQ-9 to clients via email, with the option to schedule before every appointment, before every other appointment, or at intake only. The platform calculates scores, graphs trends across visits in the client’s profile, and surfaces a high-risk flag when a client responds affirmatively to the suicidal ideation question on Question 9. The patient also sees a crisis-resources modal when submitting a measure with a positive Question 9 response. For SimplePractice users, this functionality is included rather than billed separately.

TherapyNotes offers similar PHQ-9 administration as part of its intake packets, with automatic scoring. The platform includes a wide range of practice management features including telehealth and integrated billing.

ICANotes offers 150+ built-in clinical forms including PHQ-9, GAD-7, CAGE, and C-SSRS, with real-time scoring, automated alerts for rating-scale forms, and integration into initial assessments and progress notes.

The honest fit for all three: EHR-native PHQ-9 is the right starting point for the majority of solo therapists and small practices that are already on one of these platforms. The PHQ-9 functionality is competent, the scoring is accurate, the Question 9 flagging works, and there is no incremental cost or vendor relationship to manage.

The trade-off is that these platforms administer the PHQ-9 the way they administer every other form via email or portal, at the cadence the clinician schedules, with completion entirely dependent on the patient. There is no voice administration, no real-time alert routing beyond the in-app flag, and no automatic delivery of the scored result into a clinic’s separate EHR (because the platform is the EHR).

Voice-Administered AI

This is the smallest and newest category in the 2026 landscape. The defining features: the patient speaks with an AI voice assistant rather than completing a digital form, scoring is calculated in real time from the spoken responses, Question 9 alerts route to assigned clinical staff before the patient enters the consultation room, and the structured result is delivered into the clinic’s existing EHR.

MedLaunch is the commercial vendor in this category of voice-administered AI PHQ-9 screening targeted at outpatient mental health and psychiatry clinics. The system administers the standard PHQ-9 by voice, scores it instantly against validated severity thresholds, routes Question 9 alerts to assigned clinical staff in real time, stores longitudinal trends against the patient record, and delivers the structured result directly into the clinic’s existing EHR before the consultation begins. The system is HIPAA-aligned, with a Business Associate Agreement signed before go-live, audio not retained after note generation, and patient data not used to train external AI models.

The honest fit: MedLaunch is best for outpatient mental health and psychiatry clinics that want screening to happen before the clinician sits down, without requiring patients to remember to complete an emailed form, without front-desk involvement, and with automatic Question 9 alert routing that does not depend on the clinician opening the chart at the start of the visit. It is not a measurement-based care platform with a 540-assessment library. It is a focused tool that does one thing: voice-administered PHQ-9 with real-time delivery and integrates into the clinic’s existing infrastructure rather than replacing it.

For a complete walkthrough of how the system works, see What Is AI PHQ-9 Screening? The Essential 2026 Guide for Clinic Owners.

4. Comparison Matrix

A side-by-side view across the seven criteria. Caveat: vendor-specific details should be verified directly with each vendor before procurement; product features change.

	Modality	Q9 alert	EHR integration	Longitudinal tracking	BAA	Patient effort	Workflow disruption
Phreesia	Tablet at check-in	High-risk flag in result	Integrates with most EHRs	Yes, within Phreesia	Yes	Low (in-clinic moment)	Front desk distributes tablet
NeuroFlow	Patient app + clinician dashboard	Severity-score-based flag, dashboard alert	Integrates with EHR	Yes, dashboard	Yes	Low-medium (app installation)	Minimal once configured
Greenspace Health	Email/text/portal/in-session	High-risk flag in dashboard	Some EHR integrations	Yes, dashboard	Yes	Patient-driven completion	Minimal
Mirah	Multiple modalities	Dashboard-level alerting	Enterprise integrations	Yes, enterprise dashboard	Yes	Patient-driven completion	Multi-site coordination required
Blueprint	Patient app + clinician dashboard	High-risk flag	Standalone (sits alongside EHR)	Yes, dashboard	Yes	Patient-driven completion	Adopted alongside EHR
Owl Practice	Email/in-session within Owl EHR	High-risk flag in client profile	Native (Owl is the EHR)	Yes, native	Yes	Patient-driven completion	Minimal if already on Owl
SimplePractice	Email/portal within SimplePractice EHR	High-risk flag + patient crisis modal	Native (SimplePractice is the EHR)	Yes, native graph	Yes	Patient-driven completion	None for existing SimplePractice users
TherapyNotes	Intake packet within TherapyNotes EHR	Auto-scored result	Native (TherapyNotes is the EHR)	Yes, native	Yes	Patient-driven completion	None for existing users
ICANotes	Built-in form within ICANotes EHR	Real-time alerts on rating scales	Native (ICANotes is the EHR)	Yes, native	Yes	Patient-driven completion	None for existing users
MedLaunch	Voice-administered AI (in-clinic or remote)	Real-time alert to clinical staff before consultation	Integrates with existing EHR	Yes, in EHR record	Yes (signed before go-live)	Low (voice interaction)	Minimal runs alongside existing workflow

A few honest observations about this matrix:

• The MBC platforms (NeuroFlow, Greenspace, Mirah, Blueprint) and the EHR-native options (SimplePractice, TherapyNotes, ICANotes, Owl) handle the administrative PHQ-9 task well. They differ in scale and dashboard sophistication.
• The category that is structurally different is voice-administered AI because the patient is not filling out a form. The interaction is conversational, the alert routing is real-time, and the result is delivered before the consultation begins.
• No tool on this list is “best” in a vacuum. The best tool depends on what the clinic is trying to solve.

5. Which Tool Fits Which Clinic Profile

This is the section most clinic owners actually need.

Solo therapist or small practice already on SimplePractice, TherapyNotes, or ICANotes

The right answer is almost always: use the PHQ-9 already built into your EHR. Recurring email delivery, automatic scoring, longitudinal trend graphs, and Question 9 high-risk flagging all included. Adding a separate vendor on top of a competent native solution is a procurement decision that needs to be justified by something the native tool does not do.

Therapy practice that wants advanced dashboards or therapeutic alliance measurement

Greenspace Health is purpose-built for this. It earns its keep when the clinician wants visual progress dashboards to share with clients during sessions, and when measurement of the therapeutic alliance matters as much as symptom severity.

Multi-site behavioral health organization or health system

Mirah is the enterprise option. NeuroFlow is the strongest fit for behavioral-health-in-primary-care integration models. Both are real measurement-based-care infrastructure, not just PHQ-9 tools.

Primary care or multi-specialty group that wants in-clinic check-in screening

Phreesia is the established choice. PHQ-9 is one screening among many handled by the same intake platform.

Psychiatry or mental health clinic that wants screening completed before the clinician sits down and Question 9 alerts routed in real time

This is where voice-administered AI fits. MedLaunch is the commercial option in this category as of 2026. The fit is strongest for clinics where:

• The clinician arriving at the consultation already informed about depression severity matters clinically
• Question 9 alerts arriving before the patient enters the consultation room (rather than when the clinician opens the chart) is a meaningful safety improvement
• The patient population includes people for whom completing an emailed form is unreliable
• Front desk staff cannot reliably administer the PHQ-9 manually at the volume the clinic is operating at

Clinic that wants to combine EHR, MBC, and PHQ-9 in one platform

Owl Practice or Blueprint. Both fold PHQ-9 into a broader practice-management environment.

6. The Five Hard Questions to Ask Any Vendor Before You Buy

Demo decks rarely answer these. The answer to each one will tell you more than an hour of vendor pitch.

Question 1 — When exactly does a positive Question 9 response trigger an alert, and to whom?

The answers vary substantially across vendors. “When the clinician opens the chart” is a different system from “in real time when the patient submits.” Press for the specific timing, the specific notification channel, and the specific staff role that receives the alert.

Question 2 — Will you sign a Business Associate Agreement at the price tier I’m being quoted?

Some vendors require an enterprise tier to access a BAA. Some include it at every paid tier. Some will not sign one at all. The answer needs to be in writing before any patient data flows.

Question 3 — Where does the scored result land in our EHR, in your dashboard, or both?

A score that lives only in the vendor’s dashboard requires the clinical team to log into a parallel system. A score that flows into the clinic’s primary EHR is part of the existing workflow. Confirm specifically how the integration works, and whether it requires custom development.

Question 4 — What happens if the patient does not complete the screening?

The honest answer for email-and-portal-based PHQ-9 is: the assessment goes uncompleted unless the patient or staff follows up. Some vendors offer reminder cadences; some do not. For tablet-based and voice-administered systems, the answer is different because the screening happens during a captive moment.

Question 5 — What is your data retention and training policy?

Specifically: Is patient response data retained after scoring? For how long? Is patient data used to train external AI models? Is voice or chat data retained? Are these policies documented in the BAA, or only in the marketing materials?

7. How MedLaunch Fits in This Landscape

The honest version of this section.

MedLaunch is not a measurement-based-care platform with a 540-assessment library. It is not an EHR. It is not a patient-engagement app, a tablet check-in system, or an ambient session-content analyzer.

MedLaunch is a focused tool that does one thing: voice-administered AI PHQ-9 screening, with real-time scoring, Question 9 alert routing to assigned clinical staff before the consultation, and direct delivery of the scored result into the clinic’s existing EHR.

It fits in the landscape as the voice-administered category, alongside very few commercial peers in 2026. It complements rather than replaces an EHR. It is not a fit for every mental health clinic. It is the right fit for outpatient mental health and psychiatry clinics that want screening to happen before the clinician sits down, with Question 9 alerts that arrive in real time rather than when the chart is opened, and with the result delivered into the EHR the team is already using.

For clinics whose primary need is full MBC infrastructure across many instruments and sites, the right answer is one of the MBC platforms named in Section 3, not MedLaunch. For clinics already on a mental health EHR with built-in PHQ-9 functionality that is working, the right answer is to use what is already there. For clinics whose front desk is reliably administering PHQ-9 manually with completion rates and alert handling that satisfies the clinical leadership, no vendor is needed.

For the clinic profile MedLaunch is built for, voice-administered AI is structurally different in ways that matter: completion rates are high because the screening happens during a captive moment, Question 9 alerts route in real time before the consultation, and the clinician arrives at the visit already informed.

To see whether the fit is right for your specific clinic, the next step is a 20-minute walkthrough of how the system would be configured for your screening cadence, alert routing, and EHR integration.

8. Frequently Asked Questions

What is the best AI tool for automating PHQ-9 screening in 2026?

There is no single best tool. The right choice depends on the clinic profile. EHR-native PHQ-9 (SimplePractice, TherapyNotes, ICANotes) is the right starting point for most solo therapists and small practices. Measurement-based-care platforms (NeuroFlow, Greenspace, Mirah, Blueprint) are the right fit for organizations running systematic outcome measurement at scale. Phreesia is the established choice for primary care and multi-specialty groups using tablet-based check-in screening. Voice-administered AI (MedLaunch) is the newest category, fitting outpatient mental health and psychiatry clinics that want screening completed before the clinician sits down, with real-time Question 9 alerting.

What is the difference between AI PHQ-9 tools and just using an EHR’s built-in PHQ-9 form?

For most solo therapists already on a competent mental health EHR, the built-in PHQ-9 is genuinely sufficient. The differentiation matters when the clinic needs something the EHR-native form does not provide: voice administration that does not depend on patient-completion rates, real-time Question 9 alert routing that does not wait for chart-open events, longitudinal trend visibility across multiple instruments and sites, or enterprise dashboards for measurement-based care across many clinicians.

Are AI PHQ-9 tools HIPAA compliant?

It varies by vendor and by tier. Any vendor processing patient data on behalf of a covered entity must sign a Business Associate Agreement. Some vendors require an enterprise tier to access a BAA. Always confirm BAA availability in writing before patient data flows to the system. Verify data retention policies, encryption practices, and whether patient data is used for external AI model training.

Does Phreesia work for outpatient mental health clinics?

Phreesia is built for the in-person check-in workflow common in primary care and multi-specialty practices. It can administer PHQ-9 in any setting that uses tablet check-in. It is less commonly adopted in outpatient mental health practices because the workflow there is structured differently and the front desk is rarely the screening trigger.

What is the difference between NeuroFlow and Mirah?

Both are measurement-based-care platforms. NeuroFlow focuses on integrating behavioral health into primary care and other clinical settings, with a patient-facing app and a triage-oriented severity score. Mirah operates at the enterprise level for large health systems, with a 540+ assessment library and centralized analytics. NeuroFlow’s typical customer is a primary-care or behavioral-health-integrated organization. Mirah’s typical customer is a multi-site health system or large network.

Is Blueprint still a measurement-based-care platform?

Blueprint has shifted toward marketing itself as an “AI-Assisted EHR for therapists.” PHQ-9 and other outcome measures remain part of the platform, but the broader product now includes structured progress notes, treatment plan generation, and session-level features. For practices specifically wanting MBC plus AI-assisted documentation in one tool, Blueprint is a reasonable fit. For practices wanting standalone MBC infrastructure, Greenspace, Mirah, or NeuroFlow may be a better match depending on scale.

How is voice-administered AI PHQ-9 different from a chatbot?

A chatbot handles open-ended dialogue. A voice-administered AI PHQ-9 system delivers the standard nine-item instrument in its validated form, captures spoken responses, calculates the score against validated severity thresholds, and routes the result into the EHR. The AI’s role is to administer the validated instrument reliably, not to have a clinical conversation. The PHQ-9 itself is unchanged; what changes is the administration and the delivery.

How long does it take to implement an AI PHQ-9 tool?

EHR-native PHQ-9 (SimplePractice, TherapyNotes, ICANotes) is available immediately to existing platform users, with no implementation needed. MBC platforms like NeuroFlow, Greenspace, and Mirah typically require a setup period that varies by clinic size and integration scope. Voice-administered AI through MedLaunch is typically live within days, with EHR integration, alert routing, and staff briefing handled by the vendor end-to-end.

Can these tools handle PHQ-9 for psychiatry medication management visits?

Yes, most of them can be configured to administer PHQ-9 at any cadence the clinic uses, including before every visit, before medication review visits, or at intake only. The differentiation across vendors is in how the cadence is administered (email, app, tablet, voice) and how the result is delivered (in dashboard vs. directly into the EHR). For psychiatry practices specifically, the workflow question is whether the scored trend should be visible to the prescribing clinician before they make medication decisions, which is where real-time, EHR-native delivery matters most.

What is the typical cost range for AI PHQ-9 tools in 2026?

Pricing varies substantially by category. EHR-native PHQ-9 is included in the EHR’s monthly subscription at no incremental cost for SimplePractice, TherapyNotes, and ICANotes users. MBC platforms typically price per clinician or per patient, with enterprise tiers for multi-site organizations. Tablet-based platforms like Phreesia bundle PHQ-9 with broader intake services. Voice-administered AI is priced based on the clinic’s deployment scale and integration scope. Always verify current pricing directly with each vendor.

9. Conclusion

The PHQ-9 has been the standard depression screening instrument for over twenty years. The instrument itself is not the question. What has changed in 2026 is the infrastructure available to administer it consistently, score it accurately, route Question 9 alerts in real time, and deliver longitudinal trends to the clinician at the point of care.

That infrastructure is fragmented across modalities. EHR-native forms, MBC platforms, tablet check-in systems, and voice-administered AI each do something different, fits a different clinic profile, and produces a different operational result.

The mistake most clinics make is treating these as interchangeable options to be ranked. They are not interchangeable. The right choice depends on what the clinic is actually trying to solve: completion-rate friction, Question 9 alert latency, multi-site outcome measurement, primary care integration, or screening-before-consultation delivery.

This guide gives you the modality map, the criteria framework, and the vendor-by-vendor honest description. The decision belongs to the clinic that knows its own workflow.

If your clinic profile points to voice-administered AI outpatient mental health or psychiatry, where screening before the clinician sits down matters and where Question 9 alerts arriving in real time is a meaningful safety improvement, the next step is a 20-minute walkthrough of how MedLaunch would configure for your specific cadence, alert routing, and EHR integration.