AI documentation and the Doctolib practice software: what the vendor says
The same simple path applies to the Doctolib practice software as to any other system: the draft is created alongside the consultation, you review it and paste the approved part into the free-text field after copying it into the practice software. Doctolib publishes its own feature, the AI consultation assistant; what the vendor does and does not state about it is below.
Reviewed editorially against product behaviour and the stated primary sources; not individual medical or legal advice.
How the reviewed draft gets into the Doctolib practice software
The process ends where you document anyway: in the free-text field. You read the draft in full, shorten it, copy the rest and paste it in. The deliberate click is not a missing feature here but the point at which a draft becomes documentation.
A note on the honesty of this page: on the reviewed product page, Doctolib makes no statement about which platform the practice software runs on. This point therefore belongs among the questions to ask the vendor, not among assumptions.
Who the Doctolib practice software is built for
For the rollout of the practice software, Doctolib writes "Initially GPs, paediatricians and gynaecologists – further specialties to follow in stages" (accessed on 4 September 2026).
These three groups hold very different consultations — from the short check-up to the long, repeatedly interrupted appointment. For evaluating a documentation tool, the second kind matters, because that is where the follow-up work arises.
What Doctolib itself publishes
Doctolib publishes its own feature under the name AI consultation assistant; the reviewed product page carries the line "The AI consultation assistant for your medical practice." A description of the technical process and a statement on the processing location were not on this page as of 4 September 2026.
Descriptions of this feature exist in the trade press, but they are the wrong source for a purchasing decision. What counts is what the vendor itself commits to in writing — in particular regarding the three pathways: where the audio stays, where the text goes, how long what is stored.
| Item | What the vendor publishes |
|---|---|
| Target audience per vendor | "Initially GPs, paediatricians and gynaecologists – further specialties to follow in stages" |
| Platform per product page | not stated on the page reviewed |
| Own AI feature per vendor | "The AI consultation assistant for your medical practice" |
| Processing location per product page | not stated on the page reviewed |
| Published price per product page | not stated on the page reviewed |
Each row reflects what stood on the linked vendor page on the date checked. Items not stated are marked as such in the table; they are not filled in here or supplemented from other sources. Vendor pages change — check the item again before making a decision.
What the practice should clarify before a pilot
The technical questions are quickly answered with this pathway. The questions that remain concern the workflow within the team — and they should be answered before the first real appointment, not after.
- Which platform does the practice software run on for you, and where is documentation carried out?
- What does the vendor state in writing about the processing location of its own AI feature?
- How long are the recording, transcript and draft each stored — and by whom?
- Which field does the reviewed draft get pasted into?
- Who on the team gives final approval when several practitioners share the same record?
Frequently asked questions
Does KiPT Voice work directly inside the Doctolib practice software?
No. The reviewed draft is pasted into a free-text field after being copied into the practice software; there is no interface and no module.
What does Doctolib say about the processing location of the AI consultation assistant?
The reviewed product page stated nothing about this as of 4 September 2026. Get this stated in writing before comparing two tools.
Why doesn't this page state what the trade press writes about the feature?
Because only what the vendor itself commits to counts for a purchasing decision. This page reflects solely what stood on the vendor pages, with a date.