Skip to main content
    Kriv AI

    Life Sciences AI

    Real World Evidence AI Platform: What to Require Before You Buy

    Real world evidence platforms promise faster answers from health data. Regulators care whether the data is fit for purpose and the analysis is documented. Kriv AI helps life sciences teams govern and validate the platform, not resell one.

    A real world evidence AI platform turns routinely collected health data, such as electronic health records, claims, and registries, into evidence for regulatory and commercial decisions. FDA says that evidence must be fit for purpose. Kriv AI does not sell a platform; our governance and validation work starts at $200 per hour.

    context

    What a Real World Evidence Platform Is Supposed to Do

    Vendors use the label for very different products: data aggregators, analytics workbenches, and AI tools that extract structure from clinical notes. The regulatory vocabulary is narrower, and it is the right place to start when you evaluate one.

    The FDA definitions your platform has to map to

    FDA defines real-world data as "data relating to patient health status and/or the delivery of health care routinely collected from a variety of sources," with examples that include electronic health records, medical claims, and product or disease registries. Real-world evidence, in FDA's words, is "the clinical evidence about the usage and potential benefits or risks of a medical product derived from analysis of RWD."

    The distinction matters when you buy. A platform that stores and harmonizes data is handling RWD. Only the analysis, with its design, methods, and documentation, produces RWE. FDA also notes that it has "a long history of using" this kind of data "to monitor and evaluate the postmarket safety of approved drugs," while use to support effectiveness has been "on a more limited basis." The bar for each use is different, and a platform should state which one it is built for.

    Fit for purpose is the test, not feature count

    FDA says it is committed to realizing the potential of "fit-for-purpose RWD to generate RWE." Fit for purpose is a property of the data and the question together. The same claims dataset can be adequate for describing treatment patterns and inadequate for estimating an effect. A platform demo that shows a polished dashboard tells you nothing about whether the underlying data answers your question.

    ai gap

    Where AI Enters the Evidence Pipeline, and Where Risk Does

    AI usually shows up in three places: extracting variables from unstructured notes, linking or deduplicating patient records, and generating or screening analyses. Each is a step that changes the data or the result, so each needs to be reproducible and documented.

    FDA's draft guidance on AI for regulatory decision-making provides "a risk-based credibility assessment framework that may be used for establishing and evaluating the credibility of an AI model for a particular context of use." As fetched for this page, the document is marked draft, level 1 guidance, with non-binding recommendations, and it addresses AI used to produce information or data supporting decisions about the safety, effectiveness, or quality of drugs. Its logic is useful for RWE even where it does not strictly apply: define the question the model answers, assess the risk of a wrong answer, and show evidence the model is credible for that use. Our page on the FDA AI model credibility framework walks through the steps.

    capabilities

    What to Require From a Real World Evidence AI Platform

    Documented data provenance and lineage

    You should be able to trace every analytic dataset back to source systems, transformations, and versions. FDA's RWE program includes guidance on assessing electronic health records and medical claims, and on assessing registries, to support regulatory decisions. A platform that cannot show how a record moved from source to analysis will struggle to support those assessments.

    A validated, versioned AI layer

    Any model that extracts, links, or classifies data should have a stated context of use, measured performance on your data, a change-control process, and an audit trail. Treat a vendor's model update like any other change to a validated system. Our guidance on 21 CFR Part 11 and GxP AI validation covers the controls that apply.

    Study design that can be defended

    FDA's draft guidance on non-interventional studies, issued in March 2024 under its RWE Program, gives recommendations to sponsors considering submitting an observational study "to contribute to a demonstration of substantial evidence of effectiveness and/or evidence of safety of a drug." The platform should support pre-specified protocols and analysis plans, not only ad hoc exploration.

    Privacy, access control, and no lock-in

    Patient-level data brings HIPAA and contractual limits. Require role-based access, de-identification methods you can document, and the right to export your analytic datasets and code, so the evidence outlives the contract.

    differentiation

    How This Differs From Our Other Life Sciences Pages

    This page helps you evaluate and govern a platform that produces evidence from health data. Our AI model credibility framework page covers the FDA draft guidance in depth, our clinical trial AI validation evidence page covers trial settings, and our pharmacovigilance audit page covers safety-monitoring AI. Use this page when the decision is which real world evidence platform to adopt and what to demand of it.

    engagement

    How an Engagement Works

    We start with the evidence questions you need to answer and the data sources you plan to use, then review a candidate or existing platform against the requirements above: provenance, AI validation, study design support, and access controls. The output is a documented gap list and remediation plan your quality, regulatory, and data science teams can act on. We work alongside your teams and do not resell any vendor's product.

    tiers

    What You Get at Each Tier

    1. 1. Enterprise / regulated (pharma, biotech, health systems)

      A platform requirements and vendor assessment, AI validation plan, and documented governance for the evidence pipeline, written for quality and regulatory review.

    2. 2. Fractional CTO / AI governance lead

      Ongoing oversight as data sources, models, and studies are added, including change-control review of vendor model updates.

    3. 3. Specialized advisory

      A single session or second opinion on a platform selection, a study approach, or a validation plan already in design.

    rate card

    Kriv AI's Rates for This Work

    These are Kriv AI's own published rate floors, not an industry average.

    TrackKriv hourly rateTypical engagement modelMinimum engagement
    Enterprise / regulated (banks, broker-dealers, payment processors)From $200/hrFixed-scope project or retainer$8,000
    Fractional CTO / AI governance lead$300 to $400/hrPart-time, ongoing (monthly)$8,000
    Specialized advisory (vendor evaluation, second opinion)$400 to $700/hrHourly, per-sessionVaries by engagement
    Small business$150/hrReferred to Kriv AI's partner networkn/a

    get a quote

    How to Get a Real Quote

    The rates above are floors, not a quote. Actual price depends on how many data sources and studies are in scope, how much lineage and validation documentation already exists, and whether AI is used inside the evidence pipeline. Book a discovery call and we will scope it honestly.

    Straight answers

    Frequently asked questions about Real World Evidence AI Platform: What to Require Before You Buy

    What is the difference between real-world data and real-world evidence?

    FDA defines real-world data as data on patient health status or health care delivery that is routinely collected from sources such as electronic health records, claims, and registries. Real-world evidence is the clinical evidence about a medical product's usage and potential benefits or risks derived from analyzing that data.

    Does FDA require a specific real world evidence platform?

    FDA's RWE program publishes guidance on data sources, study design, and submissions rather than endorsing platforms. The guidance on non-interventional studies is a draft with non-binding recommendations, so the evidence and its documentation, not the tool, are what you defend.

    Where does AI create risk in an RWE pipeline?

    In steps that change data or results, such as extracting variables from clinical notes, linking patient records, and generating analyses. Each needs a stated context of use, measured performance, change control, and an audit trail.

    Do you sell a real world evidence platform?

    No. Kriv AI provides governance, validation, and vendor-assessment consulting and does not resell any platform.

    Talk to the team that would do the work

    Bring your requirements to a working session with the person who'll actually deliver.

    Book a Discovery Call