Platform comparison
SMAAT vs Avicenna
Avicenna (formerly Ethica Data) is a mature, commercial ESM platform popular in clinical and behavioural-health research. SMAAT is a newer, EU-hosted alternative with an integrated survey-and-cognitive-task builder, built-in compliance monitoring, and academic-fair pricing. Below is a side-by-side comparison to help you choose.
Researched and last updated: 27 May 2026. We try to keep this comparison factual. If you spot an inaccuracy, email info@open-lab.online and we'll update it.
Avicenna
Closed-source commercial ESM/EMA platform (formerly Ethica), used widely in clinical research with strong sensor integrations.
Typical academic price: Quote-only; typically mid four figures per year for an academic lab
Visit Avicenna →SMAAT
Open, EU-hosted research platform with integrated survey-and-cognitive-task builder and built-in compliance monitoring.
Typical academic price: Pro €63/mo academic, billed annually (€756/yr); Free tier (1 study / 5 participants)
See SMAAT pricing →Avicenna does not publish prices. Figures above are based on community reports from 2024–2026 and may not reflect your specific quote. Confirm with the vendor.
Feature-by-feature
| Feature | SMAAT | Avicenna |
|---|---|---|
| Public pricing on website | Yes — list and academic prices visible to all visitors | No — quote-only |
| Free academic tier | Yes — 1 study, 5 participants, no card required | Trial only; no permanent free tier |
| EU-hosted by default | Yes — DigitalOcean Frankfurt (Germany) | Multi-region; verify EU-only routing in your contract |
| End-to-end encryption with researcher-held key | Yes — optional per-study public/private key encryption | Server-side encryption; researcher-held key option not standard |
| Integrated cognitive-task library Mobile-tuned defaults included on SMAAT (trial counts, ISI, scoring) | Yes — Stroop, n-back, go/no-go, flanker, simple RT, trail-making, spatial span, finger tapping, matrix reasoning, symbol-digit | Limited — third-party task integration typically required |
| Five notification schedule types | Fixed-time, random-within-window, interval, event-based, geofenced — all configurable per study | Yes — comparable scheduling options |
| Automated compliance alerts | Yes — built-in real-time response-rate dashboards and inactivity flags from Basic plan up | Available, but typically configured manually in higher-tier plans |
| Validated scales library | Yes — public scales library, browsable + clonable from templates | Limited; depends on tier and customer-built content |
| Public, browseable template library | Yes — 30+ public templates, JSON-LD indexed for SEO | No public browseable library |
| Open architecture / extensibility | Open API and customisable surveys; data export as CSV (and SPSS on Pro+) | Proprietary; data export available, less customisable |
| Mobile platforms | iOS + Android (native via Expo / React Native) | iOS + Android |
| Mobile sensors supported | GPS, accelerometer, gyroscope, magnetometer, pedometer, barometer | Comparable, plus deeper passive-sensing options and Fitbit integration on higher tiers |
| GDPR DPA available | Yes — DPA available on request | Yes |
| Maturity / track record | Newer platform (founded 2025); used in research projects at the University of Konstanz | Mature platform; many published studies; well-known in clinical research |
When to pick Avicenna
Pick Avicenna when ecosystem breadth, integrations with specific wearables (Fitbit, BACtrack), and a long track record of clinical use are decisive — and when you have the budget for a mid-four-figure annual commitment.
When to pick SMAAT
Pick SMAAT when you want an EU-hosted, GDPR-native platform with transparent pricing, an integrated cognitive-task library, automated compliance monitoring, and end-to-end encryption with a researcher-held key — at academic-fair pricing.
Sources
Still deciding?
Bring the question to a 20-minute call. We'll walk through your study design and tell you honestly whether SMAAT fits.