Questions, answered properly.

A platform that a licensed provider uses to give a child a personalized daily brain-training program and then supervise it remotely. The child completes a digital assessment, an algorithm composes a program from a library of skill-based games, you approve and dose it, the child trains at home or in your clinic, and you monitor adherence and performance between visits.

It is designed for children, and the games are pitched accordingly. Whether a specific child can access a screen-based task — given their motor, visual, sensory and attentional profile — is a clinical judgement, and it is yours rather than ours. We will happily talk through borderline cases on a demo.

A device with a browser and an internet connection. There is no hardware to buy, nothing to install, and no app-store dependency.

More than thirty, with new ones added regularly and made available to every account. Each is mapped to specific functions — timing, inhibition, sustained attention, working memory, processing speed, calculation fluency. Which games a child sees is determined by their program rather than by their preference.

Yes. The algorithm proposes; you can adjust any allocation or override it entirely. Nothing reaches a child without your approval.

About three minutes to review and approve a new patient's program, once. No billable session time at all — the assessment and the training both run outside your appointment. Most providers then do one weekly pass across the whole caseload, which takes around ten minutes.

There is no integration to configure. It runs in a browser alongside whatever you already use and produces exportable progress summaries you can attach to a note. For most small practices that is a feature rather than a limitation — nothing for an EMR vendor to approve and nothing to break at their next release.

You can have a first patient assessed the day your account opens. Training is a live walkthrough and is included — for your current staff and for anyone you hire later.

Yes, and many practices do both — a station during a session, plus a home account for the days in between. They are billed differently (office minutes versus a monthly home account) but measured identically, and a child moves between them without losing history.

Technically, yes — the platform is location-independent. Legally, telehealth is governed by where your patient is rather than where you are, so the scope of your licence decides who you may treat. We give you the reach; the licensure question remains yours.

More reliably than a printed exercise sheet, because the child is opening a game rather than completing a chore. But adherence in paediatric home programs is a stubborn, well-documented problem, and any vendor claiming to have eliminated it is overstating. What genuinely changes is that when a family drifts you see it that week, and a short call at the right moment is usually enough.

We have not completed a controlled trial, so we make no efficacy claims and publish no outcome percentages. A clinical study is under way and results will be published with the population, instrument, sample size and design stated plainly — whatever they show. Our full position is on the evidence page, including a list of the claims we deliberately do not make.

No. eMazeBrain is not marketed as a medical device and does not hold FDA clearance or authorisation. It is a training tool assigned and supervised by a licensed provider as part of a treatment plan. It does not diagnose and is not a substitute for evaluation, therapy or medication.

Those are largely consumer products where the user picks what to do and nobody supervises. Here a licensed provider assigns the program, sets the dose, sees every session, and adjusts it. The training is the visible part; the clinical control loop is the actual product. There is a side-by-side comparison on the homepage.

A fair objection, raised by parents and by occupational therapists. Sessions are short and capped at the duration you set — a typical program is six to ten minutes a day, not open-ended play. The child cannot extend the session to keep playing. Whether any additional screen exposure is appropriate for a particular child is your clinical call, and you can set the dose to nothing on the days it is not.

$99 per clinician per month, $0.25 per training minute delivered in your clinic (falling to $0.20 with volume), and $35 per month for a patient training at home. Everything is published on the pricing page, including a calculator.

Yes. We agree the terms on the demo so they fit your caseload rather than a number that suits us.

It depends on your discipline, payer mix and jurisdiction, and coverage for remote monitoring and digital therapeutic time is genuinely uneven. We provide exportable session and progress documentation suitable for a note or a superbill, and will give you a specific answer for your situation on the demo. Many practices run it as a cash-pay component of a program instead — the home account is designed to be resold, and the pricing calculator shows the margin.

No annual contract and no setup fee. All fees are monthly and you can stop at the end of any month, taking your data with you.

Your practice does. You can export it at any time, including on the way out. We do not sell data and we do not train models on identifiable patient data. Detail on the security and compliance page.

Yes, with every clinic customer. A DPA is available for GDPR purposes.

We target WCAG 2.1 Level AA and will provide an accessibility conformance report on request — relevant if your district is working to an ADA Title II timeline or your organisation is under the HHS Section 504 deadlines in 2027 and 2028. See our accessibility statement.

The child sees their own progress, and you decide what to share with the family and when — usually via an exported progress summary in a review conversation. The clinical dashboard is a provider tool, not a parent portal.

No. There is no consumer version and we are not planning one. The platform is designed to be assigned and supervised by a licensed provider, and without that supervision it would be a different — and considerably weaker — product.