OpenEvidence
AI clinical decision support for physicians — cited, evidence-based answers from peer-reviewed medical literature in seconds.
Overview
OpenEvidence is an AI-powered clinical decision support platform built exclusively for verified physicians and clinicians. Founded in 2022 by Daniel Nadler (CEO, former founder of Kensho/S&P Global) and Zachary Ziegler (CTO, Harvard ML researcher), the platform allows doctors to ask natural-language clinical questions and receive instant, cited answers synthesized from peer-reviewed journals including NEJM, JAMA, and 300+ partner publications, as well as guidelines from the AMA, NCCN, ACC, and ACEP. Its DeepConsult mode deploys autonomous reasoning agents to analyze multiple studies in depth. The platform is free to verified US clinicians and is ad-supported through pharmaceutical companies.\n\nBy mid-2026, OpenEvidence had grown to over 860,000 verified US clinicians spanning 10,000+ hospitals, fielding more than 1 million clinical questions daily and reportedly used by 65% of US physicians. The company raised $250 million in a Series D round in January 2026 at a $12 billion valuation — total funding exceeds $735 million from investors including Google Ventures, Kleiner Perkins, Sequoia Capital, Nvidia, Thrive Capital, and Mayo Clinic. A voice (hands-free) mode launched in 2026, and Epic EHR integration went live at Sutter Health, Mount Sinai, and Cedars-Sinai.
Pricing
Pricing shown for reference only. These figures reflect RECATOOLS research as of 16 Jun 2026 and may be out of date or incomplete. This is not financial or purchasing advice — always confirm the current price on the provider’s official website before making any decision.
Use cases
What you can produce with OpenEvidence
- Cited, peer-reviewed answer to a clinical question with source links to NEJM, JAMA, or 300+ partner journals
- Deep literature synthesis report (DeepConsult) analyzing multiple studies for a complex clinical scenario
- Evidence-grounded prescribing guidance backed by current clinical guidelines from AMA, NCCN, ACC, or ACEP
- Voice-transcribed clinical Q&A session (hands-free mode) with written transcript and references for post-encounter review
- AMA PRA Category 1 CME credit certificate earned through in-platform educational content
- Direct in-workflow evidence lookup surfaced inside Epic EHR (for participating health systems)
ASEAN Perspective
OpenEvidence in Southeast Asia
OpenEvidence is effectively US-only in practice: access requires a US National Provider Identifier (NPI), which ASEAN and broader APAC clinicians do not hold, blocking the automated verification pathway. The company's published expansion roadmap targets English-speaking markets first (UK, Canada, Australia) with no stated timeline for Southeast Asian or broader APAC rollout, and no localization for regional clinical guidelines (MOH Singapore, Thai FDA, BPOM Indonesia, etc.). Data residency is US-centric with no disclosed PDPA, HIPAA-equivalent, or regional data-sovereignty arrangements for APAC users. Until OpenEvidence opens a non-NPI verification path and integrates ASEAN guidelines, clinicians in Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam will find it of limited practical utility — though the free access model and quality standard it sets is closely watched by regional health-tech players and investors.
OpenEvidence is genuinely transformative for US-based clinicians: it delivers fast, well-cited, evidence-grounded answers from top-tier journals at zero cost, making it arguably the strongest value proposition in medical AI today. Its 2025 USMLE perfect-score milestone and 860,000+ physician adoption in under three years signal real clinical utility validated at scale. The pharma-ad revenue model and content partnerships with NEJM, JAMA, and AMA give it a credibility floor most AI tools cannot match.\n\nHowever, significant caveats temper enthusiasm. A December 2025 preprint found accuracy on complex subspecialty cases dropped to just 41% (DeepConsult) and 34% (Quick Consult) — far below headline claims. A peer-reviewed PMC study found the tool primarily reinforced existing clinical plans rather than altering them (impact score 1.95/4). No public API exists, EHR integration is still early-stage, and the tool lacks differential diagnosis generation or drug dosing calculators. Pharmaceutical ad funding raises structural conflict-of-interest concerns that have not been independently audited.
What people say
OpenEvidence earns strong qualitative praise from US physicians for speed, citation quality, and zero cost — the Clinical AI Report rates it 4.3/5 across 16 physician reviews and ranks it #2 in clinical decision support. A 2025 PMC peer-reviewed study found high clarity (3.55/4) and relevance (3.75/4) scores but a low decision-impact score (1.95/4), suggesting it reinforces rather than redirects clinical thinking. A December 2025 preprint raised accuracy concerns on complex subspecialty queries (41% DeepConsult, 34% Quick Consult). The pharma-ad funding model, US-NPI verification gate, and absence of a public API are the most consistently cited structural limitations.
Summary of public user & expert reviews, compiled by RECATOOLS.
Notable facts
- OpenEvidence's AI model scored 100% on the US Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) in 2025 — the first clinical AI to achieve this benchmark.
- CEO Daniel Nadler previously built Kensho, an AI company acquired by S&P Global for ~$550 million — he has now applied the same literature-synthesis playbook to medicine.
- The platform generates revenue through pharmaceutical advertising at CPMs of $70–$1,000+, orders of magnitude higher than social media CPMs, targeting prescribing physicians at the moment of clinical decision-making.
- By early 2026, a physician aboard a commercial flight used OpenEvidence mid-air to determine whether a passenger's immunosuppression warranted an emergency landing — an anecdote that circulated widely in medical communities.
Frequently asked questions
About this listing
This entry was compiled from publicly available data including OpenEvidence's official website, press releases, documentation, and reputable third-party publications. RECATOOLS is not affiliated with OpenEvidence unless explicitly stated.
Third-party AI tools update their pricing, features, availability, and policies frequently. Information here may be outdated by the time you read this — we make reasonable efforts to keep listings current, but cannot guarantee absolute accuracy.
For the latest details, please refer to OpenEvidence directly →
Spotted something out of date? Suggest an update →
OpenEvidence in the news
Alternatives to OpenEvidence
More in Research & Data
