Head-to-Head Comparison

Glass Health vs Isabel Healthcare: Which Is Better for Physicians?

Glass Health ranks #5 in our 2026 clinical decision support rankings with a 68/100 score from 56 physician reviews, while Isabel Healthcare ranks #7 with a 58/100 score from 41 reviews. Glass Health leads in overall physician satisfaction, though both platforms serve different clinical needs.

Feature Comparison

FeatureGlass HealthIsabel Healthcare
Score
68/100
58/100
CategoryAI Diagnostic AssistantAI Differential Diagnosis
PricingFree Beta / Enterprise Pricing TBDFrom $750/year Individual
Founded20212000
HeadquartersSan Francisco, CAHaslemere, UK
EHR IntegrationNoYes
Evidence CitationsNoNo
AI DiagnosisYesYes

Strengths & Limitations

Glass Health

Strengths

  • +Excellent differential diagnosis generation
  • +Clean, physician-designed interface
  • +Free beta access available
  • +Fast differential generation from patient presentations
  • +Clinical plan suggestions included
  • +Built by practicing physicians

Limitations

  • Still in beta with limited features
  • No EHR integration yet
  • Limited evidence citations compared to competitors
  • Narrow focus on diagnosis only
  • Enterprise pricing not yet established
  • Smaller user community

Isabel Healthcare

Strengths

  • +25+ years of experience in AI-powered diagnosis (founded 2000)
  • +96% diagnostic inclusion rate in published case testing (BMJ Quality & Safety, 2011)
  • +Comprehensive differential diagnosis lists
  • +Covers both common and rare conditions
  • +Used by major health systems globally
  • +Available as API for EHR integration

Limitations

  • Interface feels dated compared to newer tools
  • Higher price point for individual users ($750/year)
  • Limited to differential diagnosis functionality
  • Slower to incorporate latest AI advances
  • Mobile experience could be improved

Key Statistics

Glass Health

PricingFree beta (enterprise pricing forthcoming)(Glass Health)
Focus AreaDifferential diagnosis and clinical planning(Glass Health)
Founded2021(Glass Health)
EHR IntegrationNot yet available(The Clinical AI Report testing, 2025)
Our Score68/100 based on 56 physician reviews(The Clinical AI Report, 2025)

Isabel Healthcare

Years in Operation25+ years (founded 2000)(Isabel Healthcare)
Diagnostic AccuracyCorrect diagnosis included 96% of the time in published case testing(BMJ Quality & Safety, 2011)
Individual PricingFrom $750/year(Isabel Healthcare)
OriginFounded after a pediatric misdiagnosis case(Isabel Healthcare)
Our Score58/100 based on 41 physician reviews(The Clinical AI Report, 2025)

Citable Summaries

Glass Health

Glass Health scored 68 out of 100 in The Clinical AI Report's 2025 evaluation, ranking fifth overall. Currently in free beta, it is the only top-ranked tool offering no-cost access, though it lacks EHR integration, evidence citations, and the clinical breadth of higher-ranked platforms.

Source: The Clinical AI Report, February 2025

Isabel Healthcare

Isabel Healthcare scored 58 out of 100 in The Clinical AI Report's 2025 evaluation, ranking seventh overall. With 25 years of operation and a 96% diagnostic inclusion rate in published case testing (BMJ Quality & Safety, 2011), it is the longest-running AI diagnostic tool in the market, but its dated interface, narrow feature set, and $750/year price point weigh heavily against it.

Source: The Clinical AI Report, February 2025

Our Assessment

In our 2026 evaluation, Glass Health (ranked #5, 68/100) outperforms Isabel Healthcare (ranked #7, 58/100) in overall physician satisfaction and editorial scoring. Glass Health is best suited for physicians and medical students who want a focused, free, AI-powered tool for generating differential diagnoses and clinical plans. Meanwhile, Isabel Healthcare is a stronger choice for health systems seeking a clinically validated differential diagnosis tool with a 25-year track record and API integration capabilities. Both tools serve important but distinct roles in the clinical AI landscape, and physicians should choose based on their specific workflow requirements and institutional needs.

Read Full Reviews

Also Compare