
Simple note taking and forms for my practice Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Price has gone up with features I do not need Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Last updated on Jul 28, 2026
IntakeQ offers a free trial. Information about IntakeQ pricing, plan availability, and costs is not listed on G2 by the vendor. Buyers typically need to engage directly with the vendor to understand pricing options. Final cost negotiations to purchase IntakeQ must be conducted with the seller.
*Pricing information is supplied by the software provider or retrieved from publicly accessible pricing materials. Final cost negotiations must be conducted with the seller.
The following is a quick overview of editions offered by other Patient Intake Software
| Product | Price | Features |
|---|---|---|
![]() Weave |
Starting at $199.001 Location Per Month |
|
![]() Basic Plan |
$24.001 User Per Month |
Core communication tools to streamline patient interactions, simplify daily workflows, and stay compliant.
|
![]() Free |
Free |
|
Various alternatives pricing & plans

Simple note taking and forms for my practice Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Price has gone up with features I do not need Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

IntakeQ is a flexible platform that allows us to build customized workflows for patient intake and documentation. The ability to create multiple “locations” and tailor forms has been useful for organizing different aspects of our practice, including medical-legal workflows. The interface is generally intuitive, and the platform integrates several functions (scheduling, forms, communication) into one system, which can streamline operations when configured appropriately. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
We signed up for the Engage feature after it was actively promoted, including through a seminar, with the expectation that it would streamline patient communication. However, the onboarding experience lacked meaningful support, which led to a disorganized and confusing setup from the start.
As a result, the system was configured in a way that did not align with how a single clinic operates—for example, being assigned an excessive number of communication lines that made no practical sense. This was not clearly explained upfront and did not reflect real-world use.
When we reached out for assistance, there was little guidance to correct the setup, and the response to the billing concerns was ultimately dismissive. While the cost itself was not the primary issue, the lack of support, limited willingness to resolve the situation, and rigid handling of the matter were disappointing.
This situation caused significant operational disruption. We had already transitioned our communication workflows to the platform and then had to reverse course, which required additional time, staff effort, and created unnecessary complexity in patient communications.
Overall, while the concept of the feature is useful, the combination of unclear onboarding, poor support, and inflexible handling of issues significantly impacted our experience. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.