eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite (eCART) vs CLEWICU

Direct competitors — feature-level head-to-head below. Comparability 95/100 Comparability is an AI-graded 0–100 score of how directly these two tools compete — higher means a more apples-to-apples comparison.

eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite (eCART)

by AgileMD

CLEWICU

by Clew Medical

AI Verdict

These two tools are highly comparable, both offering FDA-cleared, AI-powered clinical deterioration prediction for hospitalized adult patients. While eCARTv5 focuses on predicting death or ICU transfer with embedded clinical pathways, CLEWICU emphasizes real-time prediction up to eight hours in advance, with specialized virtual units for conditions like sepsis and heart failure. The choice between them may depend on the specific clinical pathways and specialized virtual unit support a health system prioritizes.

Choose eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite (eCART) if…

Choose eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite if your hospital needs an AI-powered solution for continuous, all-cause clinical deterioration prediction in adult ward patients. It integrates directly with EHRs, analyzes up to 97 real-time variables, and guides care with embedded clinical pathways, aiming to minimize false alarms and clinician workload.

View eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite (eCART) →

Choose CLEWICU if…

Choose CLEWICU if your critical care unit requires an FDA-cleared, AI-driven platform specifically for predicting patient deterioration, including respiratory failure and hemodynamic instability, up to eight hours in advance in adult ICU patients. It offers customizable clinical protocols and smart alerting to support high-acuity care and optimize ICU resource management.

View CLEWICU →

When choosing between AgileMD’s eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite and Clew Medical’s CLEWICU, physicians should consider their primary need for integrated care guidance versus broad, customizable surveillance. Both are FDA-cleared, AI-powered Software as a Medical Device (SaMD) platforms designed to predict patient deterioration in hospitalized adults, aiming to reduce critical events like death or ICU transfer. Both systems also integrate with existing EHRs and emphasize minimizing alarm fatigue.

eCARTv5 excels in providing continuous risk assessment and embedding clinical pathways directly into the workflow, guiding care with real-time data from up to 97 variables. This makes it particularly suitable for institutions seeking a comprehensive solution that not only predicts deterioration but also actively directs subsequent clinical actions through predefined protocols. In contrast, CLEWICU offers a broader clinical surveillance platform with customizable best practice protocols and specialized ‘Virtual Units’ for conditions like Sepsis and Heart Failure, alongside automated APACHE score documentation. This suggests CLEWICU is geared towards organizations that prioritize a highly configurable surveillance system with advanced analytics for specific high-acuity patient populations.

The key practical difference lies in their approach to clinical intervention: eCARTv5 is more prescriptive with its embedded clinical pathways, while CLEWICU offers greater flexibility through customizable protocols and specialized virtual units. Physicians looking for a system that provides direct, integrated guidance within the EHR to manage general clinical deterioration risk might lean towards eCARTv5. Conversely, those requiring a highly adaptable surveillance tool with advanced, condition-specific analytics and customizable protocols for diverse high-acuity settings may find CLEWICU to be a more fitting choice.

Reviewed by Pouyan Golshani, MD — Interventional Radiologist

Quick Comparison

Feature	eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite (eCART)	CLEWICU
Pricing	Contact vendor for tailored quote.	Not publicly disclosed
Deployment	Cloud-based SaaS, integrated directly into Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems.	Cloud, SaaS
FDA Status	1 AI-estimated	1 AI-estimated

Head-to-Head

AI-generated assessment across six dimensions based on each tool's documented features and compliance posture. Grounded in public data — not a substitute for hands-on evaluation.

Usability

Tie

Both tools emphasize seamless EHR integration and aim to reduce clinician workload and alarm fatigue. AgileMD highlights embedded clinical pathways for care guidance, while CLEWICU offers a unified patient view and Unit View dashboards, along with customizable protocols and smart alerting. Without direct user reviews or comparative studies on their interfaces, it's difficult to definitively pick a winner in usability.

Clinical Value

eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite (eCART)

eCARTv5 has undergone extensive validation, including retrospective and prospective studies across a large number of patient encounters and health systems, demonstrating superior performance compared to other early warning scores. While CLEWICU also has FDA clearance and retrospective validation, the breadth and depth of eCARTv5's validation studies, including prospective validation, suggest a stronger evidence base for its clinical value.

Pricing & Value

Tie

Both AgileMD's eCARTv5 and Clew Medical's CLEWICU do not publicly disclose their pricing, instead opting for a 'contact vendor for tailored quote' or 'enterprise model; custom quote' approach. This lack of transparency makes a direct comparison of pricing and value impossible without specific quotes.

Enterprise Readiness

Tie

Both tools are cloud-based SaaS solutions designed for EHR integration and are HIPAA compliant with FDA clearance, indicating a strong foundation for enterprise deployment. AgileMD highlights its experience with over 400 hospitals and 4,425,000+ patient encounters, while CLEWICU is built for large, data-rich, enterprise deployments and is EHR-agnostic, collecting data from various clinical sources. Both appear well-equipped for enterprise-level implementation.

Innovation

eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite (eCART)

Both tools leverage AI for predictive analytics in clinical deterioration. However, eCARTv5's continuous patient risk assessment using up to 97 variables and its embedded clinical pathways for care guidance demonstrate a more comprehensive and integrated approach to clinical decision support. CLEWICU's focus on specific virtual units (Sepsis and Heart Failure) is valuable, but eCARTv5's broader application of AI and integrated pathways suggest a slightly higher degree of innovation in its overall suite.

Support & Docs

Tie

Neither product provides extensive public details on their support and documentation beyond general statements. AgileMD mentions 'Help & Support' and 'Publications' on its website, while CLEWICU's FDA documentation refers to a user manual and customer support. Without more specific information on service level agreements, training programs, or detailed documentation availability, it is not possible to differentiate between the two.

Feature-by-Feature

Detail beyond the Quick Comparison summary. For pricing, deployment, BAA, FDA, and HIPAA see the Overview tab.

Feature	eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite (eCART)	CLEWICU
Name	eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite (u201ceCARTu201d)	CLEWICU
Company	AgileMD	Clew Medical
Key Prediction Capability	Predicts the risk of clinical deterioration (death or ICU transfer) in hospitalized adult patients, guiding care with embedded clinical pathways.	Predicts patient deterioration up to eight hours in advance, supporting high-acuity care across various inpatient settings.
Specialties	Critical Care, Emergency Medicine, Hospital Medicine	Cardiology, Critical Care, Hospital Medicine

Videos

Demos, reviews, and walkthroughs featuring eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite (eCART) and CLEWICU.

Loading videos…

Videos need JavaScript to load. Search YouTube directly →

View all on YouTube

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the depth of EHR integration for each tool and what data points do they utilize?

eCARTv5 integrates directly into EHR systems and analyzes up to 97 real-time variables, including vital signs, laboratory data, and nursing assessments, to generate a risk score and guide care with embedded clinical pathways. CLEWICU is EHR-agnostic and collects data from various clinical sources like EMRs, ADT systems, patient monitoring systems, and life support devices to build a real-time physiological profile. It uses patient data such as lab results, vital signs, and medication history, ingesting this data through direct querying of the EHR's SQL database or real-time HL7 messages.

How do the accuracy and sensitivity of eCARTv5 and CLEWICU compare in predicting patient deterioration?

eCARTv5 has demonstrated high accuracy with an AUROC of 0.834 in retrospective validation and 0.828 in prospective validation for predicting clinical deterioration (death or ICU transfer). It showed a sensitivity of 51.8% and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 9.0% at a moderate-risk threshold, and a sensitivity of 38.6% and PPV of 14.2% at a high-risk threshold. CLEWICU is stated to achieve high sensitivity and state-of-the-art precision for event prediction, with peer-reviewed studies indicating its predictions are at least five times more accurate than alerts from leading telemedicine systems. For respiratory failure, CLEWICU had a sensitivity of 53.7% and a PPV of 4.7%, and for hemodynamic instability, a sensitivity of 56.9% and a PPV of 18.5%.

What is the typical learning curve for physicians using these tools, and what kind of support is available?

eCARTv5 is designed to minimize clinician workload and integrate into existing workflows by providing automated risk stratification and early warnings. CLEWICU is intended to be used as a decision support tool by trained ICU clinicians or authorized users who have undergone training by CLEW. Both systems are designed to provide actionable data and insights to aid clinical teams.

What clinical contexts or patient populations are these tools best suited for?

eCARTv5 is designed for hospitalized adult patients on medical-surgical wards, predicting the risk of death or ICU transfer, and has shown consistent accuracy across diverse patient demographics and medical conditions, including COVID-19 and obstetric encounters. CLEWICU is validated for adult patients in intensive care unit settings and provides predictive screening for respiratory failure and hemodynamic instability, particularly relevant during events like the COVID-19 pandemic. It also offers specialized virtual units for sepsis and heart failure.

Are there audit-trail features available in these tools to track how predictions and alerts are used in clinical decision-making?

The provided information does not explicitly detail specific audit-trail features for either eCARTv5 or CLEWICU. However, as clinical decision support tools integrated with EHRs, they would typically generate logs of alerts and user interactions, which are crucial for accountability and system improvement.

What are the considerations for rolling out these tools across multiple hospital sites or a large health system?

eCARTv5 has been validated across 21 hospitals from three health systems, indicating its suitability for multi-site deployments and consistent performance across geographically diverse health systems. CLEWICU is built for large, data-rich, enterprise deployments and is EHR-agnostic, designed to collect and aggregate data from all clinical sources across a health system, making it suitable for multi-site rollouts.