Pretty Good AI vs Yosi Health

Two ways to make the phone stop ringing

Yosi Health publishes a clear claim about phone volume: direct messaging cuts it by 70 percent. Move patients to self-scheduling, digital check-in and messaging, and most of them stop calling.

Deflection works on the share of patients who will self-serve. Yosi has the record there: Best in KLAS 2024 for Patient Intake Management, 306 practice connections and 120 reviews at a 4.98 average. The number that decides this evaluation is the other one, the share of your patients who call anyway.

We built the opposite thing. Our agent answers the phone.

Both approaches reduce the same cost. They just make different bets about your patients.

The bet each product is making

A deflection product is betting your patients will self-serve if you give them a good enough digital option.

An answering product is betting that some meaningful share of them will call no matter what you build.

Neither bet is right in general. Both are testable in your own data in about twenty minutes.

Pull your last full month of inbound calls and sort them by reason. Then ask a harder question than the obvious one: not “could this have been a form”, but “would this particular patient have filled one in”. A straightforward rescheduling request, plausibly. A patient calling because their insurance changed on the first of the month and they do not know if you still take it, less often. Someone calling about a family member’s appointment, almost never.

What tends to come back is that deflection removes the simple calls first. That is genuinely valuable, and it is also why the calls left over are harder than the ones that went away. Your average handle time goes up even as your call count goes down, and the staff time you saved is smaller than the volume drop suggests.

That is not an argument against deflection. It is an argument for knowing what is left.

What we do not build

We do not collect clinical screening information. No review of systems, no history of present illness, no symptom questionnaires. Yosi publishes all of that as core product, filed into athenaOne as structured data.

Clinical decisions stay with your care team. Our agent handles booking, confirming coverage, chasing paperwork and routing requests, while the platform runs patient engagement, referral management and revenue cycle on the same athenaOne integration. Yosi is strong in structured screening and pre-visit history.

On security, ours: The Pretty Good AI platform has attained HITRUST i1 certification. Pretty Good AI signs a HIPAA Business Associate Agreement (BAA) before any patient data is touched. SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001 audit reports are available upon request. Ask both vendors for the reports under NDA and read the scope section; that tells you more than a marketplace flag does.

Where the calls actually survive

The following is an illustrative workflow, not a customer story. A multi-site pediatric group has already deployed digital intake and has good completion rates on it. Form completion is not the problem. The phone line still is.

The reason is structural rather than a failure of the intake product. A large share of the remaining calls involve someone who is not the patient and is not straightforwardly the guarantor on the account either. A parent calling about one child while another child’s appointment is the one in the system. A grandparent doing pickup who needs the visit moved. Custody arrangements where the calling parent is not the guarantor, and where legal consent for the visit is a separate question from who owns the account.

None of that is a form problem. The information needed to resolve those calls sits across the patient record, the guarantor record and the appointment, and the person calling frequently cannot supply the identifier that ties them together.

The approach that works reads the existing athenaOne structures rather than inventing new ones: patient and guarantor relationships, appointment types and their scheduling rules, and the department the appointment sits in. The agent resolves the common shapes, including moving a sibling’s appointment once it has confirmed the caller against the account.

It hands off in one specific case. When the caller is not on the account at all, the agent stops, captures what it has, and routes it to a staff member. Deciding whether an adult who is not on a minor’s account may reschedule that minor’s visit is a judgment about that family, and it belongs to a person who can make it and document why.

That handoff is the point. The measure of a front-office agent is not how many calls it finishes. It is whether it knows which calls it should not finish.

Running both

Most practices that buy both end up with a clean division: Yosi owns the digital front door and everything a patient does before they arrive, our agent owns the inbound phone line and the requests that come through it.

The friction is not architectural. It is that both platforms can send appointment reminders, and a patient who gets two of them for one visit assumes somebody made a mistake.

Decide before go-live which system owns each outbound message type, write it down, and check it again after the first month. That single decision prevents nearly all of the double-messaging problems we see when two capable platforms are live in the same practice.

Questions worth asking both of us

Ask each vendor to handle your hardest recurring case live, in an athenaOne environment rather than a sandbox. For Yosi, that means the intake flow for your most complicated appointment type. For us, it means the call your front desk least wants to take.

Then ask what happens when the system cannot complete the request, because the handoff is where front-office automation actually breaks.

Then ask which athenaOne records each product changes when the work completes, and what its marketplace connection count and review history look like. Yosi’s record on that last question is longer and larger than ours.