AI literature review that cites every sentence
ClinicalEvidence brings AI to the slowest part of a literature review: finding out what has already been studied. Ask a question, get an answer built only from trial records and published studies, and open the NCT number or PMID behind every sentence.
Why literature reviews take so long before the real work starts
Before you can appraise anything, you have to know what exists. That means searching PubMed with several term variants, repeating the search in trial registries, removing duplicates, skimming hundreds of titles and abstracts and keeping track of which registered trials never reached a publication. For a scoping question this can take days, and much of it is mechanical.
AI tools for literature review promise to shorten this, but many of them write summaries from model memory. They produce neat paragraphs with references that are wrong, misattributed or invented. A review built on that is worse than no review, because the errors are hard to spot and easy to repeat.
- Searches spread across separate databases and registries
- Registered trials without a publication easily missed
- Summaries with references that do not hold up
- No clear record of what was searched
A literature review AI tool that answers only from sources
ClinicalEvidence searches one index that combines ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, PubMed Central open access articles, the EU Clinical Trials Register and WHO ICTRP where licences allow, refreshed every day. Semantic and full text search run together, so a question phrased in plain English still finds records that use different terminology.
The language model writes only from the retrieved passages. Each sentence carries the NCT numbers or PMIDs it relies on, and automatic verification checks that the ID exists in the index and that the cited passage supports the sentence. Unsupported sentences are removed before you see the answer, and when the index holds no evidence, the answer says so. Details are on the cited answers page.
-
Trials and publications searched together, not in separate tabs
-
Registered trials shown alongside the papers that report them
-
Verified citations on every sentence
-
A "Sources searched" panel for your search notes
What AI should and should not do in a literature review
We think an honest AI literature review tool should be clear about its limits. ClinicalEvidence is good at the parts that are slow and repetitive: scoping a topic, surfacing relevant trials and studies, grouping them by phase, design and status, comparing interventions and pointing you to the exact passage behind a claim.
It should not decide on its own which studies are eligible, assess risk of bias for you or replace the judgment of a reviewer who has read the full text. Abstracts and registry records are not full papers. Use the answers to understand the landscape and to build a better search, then read, appraise and decide.
- Good use: scoping questions, landscape overviews, finding unpublished registered trials
- Good use: drafting a search strategy and checking that key studies are captured
- Not a replacement for eligibility screening by trained reviewers
- Not a replacement for full text appraisal and risk of bias assessment
For formal reviews, see how ClinicalEvidence fits next to systematic review software.
What you see for each literature question
Every question returns a cited answer and a trial table with phase, population, interventions, primary and secondary endpoints, results posted, sponsor, status, enrolment, dates and locations. Filters cover condition, intervention, phase, status, study type, date range, sponsor type, country and results available.
Evidence summaries add the level of evidence for each cited source, from meta-analyses and randomized trials to cohort studies and case series. You can save the question as an alert to receive an email when new trials or publications match it, and export the references to your reference manager.
- Export to CSV, RIS and BibTeX on every plan
- XLSX and DOCX with a reference list from Research Team
- Saved threads and comments for shared review work
Learn more about export formats and how to frame questions with the PICOS framework.
Who uses ClinicalEvidence for literature work
Academic researchers scoping a new topic, HEOR and market access consultants preparing an evidence overview, medical affairs teams answering information requests and graduate students learning to search well. Research Team and Organization plans add shared workspaces, so a group can work on one set of questions with saved threads, comments and roles.
Plans for literature review work
Save 50% with yearly billing on every plan.
- Clinician 49 USD per month, or 24 USD per month billed yearly (288 USD), 200 cited answers and 1 seat
- Research Team 199 USD per month, or 99 USD per month billed yearly (1 188 USD), 800 pooled answers and 3 seats
- Organization 499 USD per month, or 249 USD per month billed yearly (2 988 USD), 2 000 pooled answers and 10 seats
- Enterprise 1 490 USD per month, or 745 USD per month billed yearly (8 940 USD), 6 000 pooled answers and up to 50 seats
Full limits are on the pricing page.
Questions about AI literature review
Can ClinicalEvidence write my literature review?
It writes cited answers to specific questions and gives you the studies behind them. The review itself, including selection, appraisal and synthesis, remains your work.
Does it search full text articles?
It searches trial registry records, PubMed abstracts and the open access full text in PubMed Central where licences allow. Paywalled full text is not part of the index.
How do I know the references are real?
Every NCT number and PMID is checked against the index before the answer appears, and the cited passage must support the sentence. Each one links to the source record so you can confirm it yourself.
Can I move results into my reference manager?
Yes. Every plan exports RIS and BibTeX, which reference managers import directly, and CSV for spreadsheets.
Can I use it without a subscription?
No. Every visitor can ask one demo question on the homepage. After that, ClinicalEvidence is a paid subscription from 24 USD per month billed yearly.
Scope your next literature review with cited answers
Ask the first question and see which trials and studies already cover it.