Criterions

Name: Criterions
Brand: Criterions Software, Inc.
Rating: 3.9 (7 reviews)

Criterions is a cloud-based healthcare software suite that combines electronic health records, practice management/revenue-cycle workflows, e-prescribing, patient portal and intake, and published FHIR API documentation for ambulatory and independent physician practices.

LinkedIn 633|Website|FTEs 10

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

- Direct competitors and differentiators - Larger vendors (eClinicalWorks, athenahealth, NextGen) frequently serve larger groups and may benefit from scale, ecosystem breadth, and market recognition. - Criterions competes primarily in the independent ambulatory practice segment where integrated EHR+PM suites are required without enterprise overhead. - Feature comparison: potential strengths and procurement gaps - Potential strengths - Public interoperability documentation (FHIR API documentation and ONC certification disclosures) that some smaller vendors do not publish. - Potential gaps to validate in diligence - Enterprise identity and provisioning features (SAML/SCIM) - Public evidence of a formal security program (SOC 2/ISO) - Number and depth of public case studies and third-party review samples compared with larger competitors - Pricing comparison: considerations vs alternatives - AdvancedMD publishes clearer starting price points for some specialties, which can simplify initial comparisons. - athenahealth commonly uses percentage-of-collections pricing models; contract terms and long-term cost implications vary and require careful analysis. - Customer testimonials comparing Criterions to competitors - Direct switch narratives comparing Criterions to specific competitors were not located in the public materials reviewed. - Market share and adoption trends - No current, credible market share data for Criterions was located in accessible sources.

	Criterions (criterions.com)	eClinicalWorks	AdvancedMD
Starting Price	Not publicly listed (quote/demo-driven)	Public pricing page exists, but detailed configuration often requires consultation	Vendor publishes starting prices for some specialties (varies by specialty)
Target Segment	Independent practices seeking integrated EHR + PM/billing with ONC certification disclosures and published FHIR documentation	Practices seeking a vendor with large market adoption, broad modules, and an extensive ecosystem	Independent and specialty practices seeking configurable EHR/PM/RCM with published starting points for some specialties
Key Strength	Integrated suite with ONC certification disclosures and published FHIR API documentation	Large installed base and broad feature set; extensive ecosystem	Relative pricing transparency for some packages; specialty packaging
Key Weakness	Limited public pricing transparency; limited accessible review depth; security certifications not prominently published	Usability and workflow concerns reported in market feedback (varies by organization); pricing complexity	Contract and fee complexity reported in some feedback; implementation can be non-trivial

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Direct competitors and differentiators
- Larger vendors (eClinicalWorks, athenahealth, NextGen) frequently serve larger groups and may benefit from scale, ecosystem breadth, and market recognition.
- Criterions competes primarily in the independent ambulatory practice segment where integrated EHR+PM suites are required without enterprise overhead.
Feature comparison: potential strengths and procurement gaps
- Potential strengths
  - Public interoperability documentation (FHIR API documentation and ONC certification disclosures) that some smaller vendors do not publish.
- Potential gaps to validate in diligence
  - Enterprise identity and provisioning features (SAML/SCIM)
  - Public evidence of a formal security program (SOC 2/ISO)
  - Number and depth of public case studies and third-party review samples compared with larger competitors
Pricing comparison: considerations vs alternatives
- AdvancedMD publishes clearer starting price points for some specialties, which can simplify initial comparisons.
- athenahealth commonly uses percentage-of-collections pricing models; contract terms and long-term cost implications vary and require careful analysis.
Customer testimonials comparing Criterions to competitors
- Direct switch narratives comparing Criterions to specific competitors were not located in the public materials reviewed.
Market share and adoption trends
- No current, credible market share data for Criterions was located in accessible sources.

	Criterions (criterions.com)	eClinicalWorks	AdvancedMD
Starting Price	Not publicly listed (quote/demo-driven)	Public pricing page exists, but detailed configuration often requires consultation	Vendor publishes starting prices for some specialties (varies by specialty)
Target Segment	Independent practices seeking integrated EHR + PM/billing with ONC certification disclosures and published FHIR documentation	Practices seeking a vendor with large market adoption, broad modules, and an extensive ecosystem	Independent and specialty practices seeking configurable EHR/PM/RCM with published starting points for some specialties
Key Strength	Integrated suite with ONC certification disclosures and published FHIR API documentation	Large installed base and broad feature set; extensive ecosystem	Relative pricing transparency for some packages; specialty packaging
Key Weakness	Limited public pricing transparency; limited accessible review depth; security certifications not prominently published	Usability and workflow concerns reported in market feedback (varies by organization); pricing complexity	Contract and fee complexity reported in some feedback; implementation can be non-trivial

Criterions

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

02Market Map

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

02Market Map