The derm AI scribe market map: 6 vendors, $0 to $750 a month

In dermatology, your EHR has already decided which AI scribes you can buy. ModMed shops get a real choice. EZDerm shops get locked out to copy-paste. Ambient scribes went mainstream in 2025 and 2026 and every practice owner is being pitched one, but almost every demo was tuned for a 20-minute primary care visit, not the dermatologist running 50 encounters a day with biopsies, destructions, and cosmetic consults in the mix. Elion's market map tracks 119 products. The only question that matters is which ones write a derm note into a derm EHR, and that sorts into three categories: built inside your EHR, integrated from the outside, and standalone.

The scribe and the chart are the same software, which is the tightest possible integration and also the catch. A native scribe writes to discrete fields and triggers charge capture, but buying one deepens EHR lock-in: the vendor can ramp the add-on price once your documentation runs through it, and you forfeit the option to switch to a better third-party tool. You're betting your workflow on your EHR vendor's AI roadmap.

ModMed Scribe 2.0 is the most-hyped, although a bit late to the party. Ambient documentation hit enterprise scale when Nuance DAX went GA in 2020, and by early 2025 the field already had roughly 60 products in rollout, months before ModMed shipped its own. ModMed says it reached 240,000 visits across 1,600 providers in under three months, but those numbers are self-reported and there are no neutral reviews of 2.0 yet. It claims to write into the correct discrete EMA fields rather than dumping a note blob into one box, and it's the most derm-tuned scribe in the set, however a number of Clarity clients have trialed ModMed’s scribe with mixed results. 

Sunoh.ai, eClinicalWorks' own scribe, is native only inside eCW. On a ModMed or EZDerm chart it has no write-back, so you review the draft and paste it. A clinician in an eCW group called it strong on the HPI but weak on the plan, which in derm is exactly where the procedure and the coding live. 

EZDerm's "Eve" AI is not a scribe; the January 2026 announcement is billing automation and chart prep, and as far as we know, it’s still "coming soon." Nextech's Cora is a genuine native scribe, but its public proof is ophthalmology-led. 

DeepScribe is one of the only third-party scribe that we could find with a verified two-way ModMed integration: it reads the chart before the visit and writes structured docs plus suggested codes into discrete fields after, no copy-paste. The catch is that DeepScribe is oncology-first. Dermatology is a line item in its trained-specialty list with no derm page, named derm customer, or Mohs workflow. You're buying the integration, not derm intelligence, at roughly $300 to $750 a month with an 8-to-12-week build.  

SubQdocs is a derm-focused ambient scribe that claims a ModMed write-back, pushing completed notes and charges back after each visit, documented only in its own knowledge base with no synapSYS marketplace listing or user reports behind it. Their footprint is unknown: nothing on G2, Capterra, or Reddit, and stats like 60% fewer documentation denials are vendor-reported with no methodology. Pricing is $120 a doctor a month with integrations gated to annual, and an "EMR Lite BETA" tier suggests the real ambition is to replace your EMR, not feed it. If you're running it, let us know how the write-back holds up. 

Marvix markets a ModMed write-back (ModMed doesn't confirm), and there are no reviews or named customers; verify it live first. (Abridge, Suki, and Ambience are Epic-first; Augmedix is now Commure.)  EZDerm is known for its closed ecosystem, so don’t count on any scribe integrations anytime soon.  

These write a good note and leave it on your clipboard. On a derm EHR, that's copy-paste every encounter. 

Heidi is the best-funded, has a free plan, and the differentiator is its public Template Community: a clinician-built, attributed, searchable library that no private template builder matches. It ships live US coding too, but it's diagnosis and E/M assist from the narrative note. Freed (starting at $39) has the cleanest privacy posture and a real coding assistant, but the codes are copy-paste-only and its push extension misses ModMed and EZDerm. Doximity Scribe is genuinely free, copy-paste only: the $0 pilot. 

No scribe except ModMed's native option writes procedure data into the chart structurally. Everything else pushes a finished note or hands you text to paste, and at derm volume that distinction becomes money. The copy-paste tax repeats 30+ times a day per provider, and the real risk isn't the lost minutes, it's the partial paste or error, where a provider drops the procedure section and it never gets coded. A dropped destruction or biopsy is an uncoded procedure, and that's revenue that leaks out of the day. We've walked through 90 days of that leakage for one physician, and it shows up in the metrics every derm practice should watch.

So an ambient scribe is a provider-time win, not an RCM win. It gives your clinicians their evenings back, but in the copy-paste tiers it can quietly cost you revenue at the same time. The coding layer deserves the same scrutiny: when a scribe suggests an E/M or CPT level it is drafting, not deciding, and an AI confidently proposing a high-complexity code raises the same audit exposure as any aggressive code a human entered, the same dynamic behind the downcoding fights payers are picking. The billing provider still owns the claim. 

Clarity RCM manages revenue cycle for 200+ dermatology practices across 42 states. It's all we do. See how we work.