Accuracy you can audit.
Measured the way medicine measures everything: blinded, against the human standard of care.
>90%
fewer errors than certified medical interpreters
Held to medicine's standard of proof.
- Blinded, head-to-head against certified interpreters
- Run by physician-researchers on real clinical dialogue
- Every omission, substitution, and distortion counted
Far fewer errors, in every language.
Total interpretation errors in a blinded evaluation: Opalite against three certified medical interpreters per language.
Cantonese
p = .01895-97% fewer
total interpretation errors
Mandarin
p = .00595-96% fewer
total interpretation errors
Spanish
p = .01198-99% fewer
total interpretation errors
Errors per evaluation
Cantonese
p = .018
Mandarin
p = .005
Spanish
p = .011
Blinded clinical evaluation of total interpretation error counts, Opalite vs. three certified medical interpreters per language.
Weighted for severity, the gap only widens.
Each error scored for clinical severity: minor counts 1, major 5, critical 10.
>98%
fewer major and critical errors than certified interpreters
Every major and critical error was eliminated in Spanish and Cantonese.
Severity-weighted score: lower is better
- Cantonesep = .038
- 4
- 207-431
- Mandarinp = .007
- 10
- 490-636
- Spanishp = .007
- 1
- 206-279
Where certified interpretation broke down.
Among certified interpreters, the errors clustered in the two categories that matter most in a clinical visit.
44%
were information omissions
20%
were medical terminology errors
Opalite produced too few errors to categorize, with no single dominant error type.
Rated higher by blinded clinicians, chosen first every time.
A seven-domain blinded quality survey, scored on a 10-point scale.
9.0 / 10
quality rating in Cantonese
9.0 / 10
quality rating in Mandarin
9.0 / 10
quality rating in Spanish
Want the full study?
We'll walk your clinical team through it: method, error taxonomy, results.