Supio Review (2026)
Vertical AI Tools for Legal. PI / plaintiff-specific. Demand letters, medical record review, intake-to-settlement.
Supio is the AI medical record review and demand drafting platform for personal injury and mass tort firms. The company raised a $60M Series A in 2025 and serves an estimated 200+ PI firms, with concentration in firms running heavy medical record volume (mass tort, high-acuity PI, multi-claimant litigation). Supio was founded by Jaehyup Lee and Cole Henke and is positioned as the medical-record-heavy alternative to EvenUp.
The product handles medical record processing at scale. The platform ingests medical records (often 1,000-10,000+ pages per case for high-acuity matters), extracts treatment timelines, identifies relevant providers and conditions, and produces both detailed chronologies and demand-letter drafts grounded in the records. The medical record processing capability is the differentiator: Supio handles record volumes that overwhelm general PI AI tools and surfaces the specific details that drive demand-package quality.
The buyer profile is high-volume PI firms, mass tort coordinators, and firms handling complex medical scenarios (TBI, spinal injury, multi-system trauma) where the medical record review is the primary case-handling bottleneck. The pricing is custom subscription typically running $150-$400 per user per month equivalents with usage-based add-ons for record processing volume. For firms with light medical record volume, EvenUp is cheaper and adequate; Supio wins when medical complexity and volume drive the case workflow.
Verdict: AI medical record review and demand drafting for PI and mass tort.
Best for: PI and mass-tort firms with heavy medical record volume
Pricing: Likely $150-400 per user/month, contact sales
Pros and Cons
- Handles medical record volumes (1,000-10,000+ pages) that overwhelm general PI AI tools
- Specialized for high-acuity PI and mass tort where medical complexity drives case value
- Chronologies include specific clinical detail that supports demand-package quality
- Integrates with Filevine, Litify, and major PI case management platforms
- ROI typically positive within first quarter for firms with high medical record volume
- Mass tort capability handles multi-thousand-claimant dockets that general PI tools cannot
- Custom subscription pricing typically $150-$400 per user per month equivalents
- Best fit specifically for high-volume PI and mass tort; over-built for lower-volume firms
- Newer to market than EvenUp with smaller customer base for reference and benchmarks
- Attorney review remains required for accuracy; AI accelerates but does not replace work
- Implementation runs 30-60 days with template and workflow customization
Common Use Cases
High-volume PI firm with heavy medical record cases
Firms doing 200-1,000+ demand packages per year with average medical record volume of 1,000+ pages per case use Supio to handle the record review bottleneck. Most firms see 70-90% time reduction on medical chronology generation versus paralegal review. The platform is particularly valuable for TBI, spinal injury, and multi-system trauma cases where record complexity overwhelms manual review.
Mass tort coordinator managing multi-thousand-claimant dockets
Asbestos, talc, opioid, and other mass tort cases involve medical record volumes per claimant (combined across the docket) that are impossible to review manually. Supio handles the bulk medical record processing with consistent quality across thousands of claimants. Pricing scales with volume but the per-claimant cost drops significantly at mass tort scale.
PI firm handling catastrophic injury and high-value matters
Firms specializing in catastrophic injury (TBI, paralysis, wrongful death) where individual case value runs $1M-$50M+ benefit from Supio's detailed medical chronology that supports the higher demand-package quality these cases require. The cost per case is meaningful but the impact on settlement value typically pays back the platform investment.
PI firm previously using paralegals for full medical record review
Firms reaching the point where paralegal capacity becomes the case-handling bottleneck (10-20 active high-acuity matters per paralegal typical ceiling) use Supio to scale beyond paralegal staffing limits. Most firms grow case capacity 50-200% without proportional paralegal hiring after Supio deployment.
Pricing Detail
Likely $150-400 per user/month, contact sales
Supio uses custom subscription pricing without a public rate card. Reported pricing runs $150-$400 per user per month equivalents with usage-based add-ons for record processing volume. Most firm-level subscriptions include allowances for monthly record processing volume with overage rates for excess usage. Mass tort and high-volume PI deployments negotiate custom pricing with bulk-record processing rates.
Annual contracts are standard with multi-year discounting. Implementation runs $5,000-$25,000 depending on template customization and integration scope. All-in annual cost for a typical 10-attorney PI firm doing 300 high-acuity demands lands $100,000-$250,000. For mass tort with multi-thousand-claimant dockets, annual cost runs $200,000-$1,000,000+ depending on docket size and processing volume.
The Verdict
Buy Supio if your PI firm handles heavy medical record volume, runs catastrophic injury cases, or coordinates mass tort. The medical record processing capability is deeper than EvenUp or Eve for high-acuity matters, and the platform delivers consistent quality across record volumes that overwhelm both human paralegals and general PI AI tools. For firms where medical complexity drives case value and case-handling cost, Supio is the specialist that pays back the premium.
Skip Supio if your PI practice runs lower-acuity cases with modest medical record volume (EvenUp at lower cost covers the typical demand workflow), if your firm focuses on the broader case lifecycle rather than medical-heavy workup (Eve covers more workflow ground), or if your case volume is too small to justify the platform premium. For high-volume PI firms with average case medical volume under 500 pages, EvenUp typically wins on price-to-value. For firms above that record volume threshold or running mass tort, Supio's medical depth is the differentiator.
Related Comparisons
Featured In These Guides
Frequently Asked Questions
Supio vs EvenUp: which is better for medical-heavy PI?
Supio for cases with high medical record volume (1,000+ pages per case typical) or high medical complexity (TBI, spinal injury, multi-system trauma). The platform handles record volumes that overwhelm EvenUp and surfaces the clinical detail that drives demand-package quality for these cases. EvenUp wins for lower-acuity cases with moderate medical record volume (200-800 pages per case typical) where the AI scope is broader (demand letters, chronology, settlement docs) but the medical depth is less specialized. Most high-volume PI firms running mixed acuity deploy EvenUp for routine cases and Supio for high-acuity matters. Firms running primarily catastrophic injury cases land on Supio as the primary platform.
Can Supio handle mass tort docket coordination?
Yes, this is one of the strongest use cases. Mass tort cases (asbestos, talc, opioid, hernia mesh, others) involve medical record volumes per claimant that aggregate into impossible-to-review-manually totals across the docket. Supio handles bulk medical record processing with consistent quality across thousands of claimants. Most mass tort coordinators running 5,000+ claimant dockets find that Supio is the only AI tool that handles their volume cleanly. Pricing scales with volume but the per-claimant cost typically lands $50-$200 versus $500-$2,000 in paralegal cost per claimant.
How accurate is Supio's medical record extraction?
High but variable with record quality. The platform extracts treatment dates, providers, diagnoses, procedures, medications, and complications from medical records with citation back to source pages. Accuracy on well-documented records (typical hospital and physician records) runs 90-97%. Accuracy drops with poor-quality scanning, handwritten notes, and incomplete records. Attorney review remains required for accuracy verification and strategic interpretation. The AI captures the clinical detail but does not make medical judgments or legal arguments. Bar ethics rules require attorney review regardless of AI confidence levels.
Supio vs Eve: which covers more PI workflow?
Eve covers more workflow breadth (intake through trial prep). Supio covers more medical record depth specifically. For PI firms with heavy medical complexity and willing to use multiple AI tools, the combination of Eve for broader workflow plus Supio for medical-record-heavy cases is common. For firms wanting one platform for everything, Eve is the broader pick. For firms where medical record review is the primary bottleneck, Supio is the deeper specialist. The decision depends on whether the firm's bottleneck is breadth of workflow or depth of medical processing.
What is the Supio implementation reality?
Plan for 30-60 days from contract signing to full productivity. Implementation includes medical chronology template customization for the firm's preferred format, demand letter template configuration, integration with the case management platform (Filevine, Litify, or other), and training for attorneys and paralegals on the workflow. Supio provides customer success support during onboarding. Time-to-full-value typically lands 60-90 days after go-live for high-volume firms processing cases through the platform consistently. Mass tort implementations take longer (90-150 days) because the docket-level configuration is more complex.
Reviewed by Rome Thorndike. Last verified 2026-05-11.
Pricing, features, and ratings are based on vendor documentation, public filings, product demos, and feedback from sales teams using these tools in production. We update reviews when vendors ship major releases or change pricing.