ClinicalEvidence is an OpenEvidence alternative built for teams that work with trial evidence: every sentence is cited to an NCT number or PMID, registered trials appear in a sortable trial table, and plans include shared seats, alerts and exports. It carries no advertising and needs no clinician NPI to sign up.
OpenEvidence is a medical AI answer engine with inline citations, widely used by US physicians and aimed at point-of-care clinical questions. That is a useful starting point for a bedside question. A medical affairs response, feasibility assessment or evidence dossier asks something different of the tool.
ClinicalEvidence is not affiliated with OpenEvidence. Choose it when your purchasing decision centers on research access, trial records and team evidence work.
The useful comparison is the work each tool supports. OpenEvidence has content agreements with NEJM Group and JAMA Network. ClinicalEvidence combines public registry records with indexed biomedical literature. For OpenEvidence features beyond the verified facts below, confirm current availability directly with the provider.
| OpenEvidence | ClinicalEvidence | |
|---|---|---|
| Who can sign up | Verified US healthcare professionals, verification commonly tied to an NPI number | Professional researchers and clinicians, no clinician NPI required |
| Price | Free for verified US clinicians | From 49 USD per month, 24 USD per month billed yearly |
| Funding model | Largely pharmaceutical advertising, according to industry reporting | Paid subscriptions, no advertising |
| Sources searched | Medical literature, with NEJM Group and JAMA Network content agreements | ClinicalTrials.gov, EU Clinical Trials Register, WHO ICTRP, PubMed and PubMed Central open access full text where licenses allow |
| Trial registry table | Confirm registry table availability with OpenEvidence | Sortable table with phase, population, endpoints, sponsor, status and more |
| Citations | Inline citations in medical answers | Every sentence cited to an NCT number or PMID, with automatic citation verification |
| Team seats | Confirm team access and seat terms with OpenEvidence | Research Team has 3 seats, Organization 10, Enterprise up to 50 |
| Alerts | Confirm alert coverage with OpenEvidence | Alerts on new trials and status changes |
| Exports | Confirm export formats with OpenEvidence | RIS and BibTeX on every plan, XLSX and DOCX on Research Team and higher |
| Best for | Point-of-care clinical questions from US physicians | Trial evidence research and shared work across life science and academic teams |
OpenEvidence is the better choice for a US physician wanting a free bedside answer tool. Its large clinician user base, premium journal content and focus on clinical questions are clear strengths. A paid research workspace makes sense when the additional registry and team workflow matches the work you need to deliver.
Start with the question your team actually needs to resolve, such as which trials test an intervention in a defined population and which report the endpoint you care about.
Ask in plain English and define the population, intervention and outcome. Add filters such as phase, status or results available when the scope requires them.
Search the index of ClinicalTrials.gov, EU Clinical Trials Register, WHO ICTRP, PubMed and PubMed Central open access full text where licenses allow. The index refreshes daily.
Read an answer written from retrieved passages. Automatic citation verification checks each NCT number or PMID and whether the cited passage supports the sentence. An answer without verified sources is not shown.
Inspect the matching trial records, compare interventions and open the underlying sources. When evidence is missing, ClinicalEvidence says so plainly.
Save the question for your team, set an alert and export the references or working tables in your plan's formats.
Read about cited answers, explore PubMed AI for literature questions, or start with clinical trial search for a registry landscape.
Every sentence carries an NCT number or PMID that opens its source. Check the passage before carrying a claim into a medical information response or a dossier draft. Citation verification supports traceability. Assessing study quality and deciding whether the evidence fits your question remains your team's responsibility.
The trial table shows phase, population, interventions, endpoints, results posted, sponsor, status, enrollment, dates and locations. Sort the records to examine the landscape. Unpublished registered trials stay visible, and the results field helps distinguish a study design from an available finding.
Compare interventions alongside the populations, comparators, endpoints and results their trials report. Differences in design remain visible for review. This helps frame a discussion about evidence gaps without treating results from separate studies as a direct treatment comparison.
Use alerts to follow new trials and status changes for a saved question. Your team can revisit the same evidence question as the registry changes, then check the source records before updating a report or sharing a new conclusion.
The fit is strongest when your deliverable involves more than an answer for the current consultation.
ClinicalEvidence is a professional research tool. It does not provide medical advice, and no patient data is needed.
Choose monthly or yearly billing. The Clinician plan supports individual research, while Research Team and higher include shared workspaces and team seats.
RIS and BibTeX exports are included on every plan. Research Team and higher add XLSX and DOCX for spreadsheets and referenced documents. Check answer limits, table limits and the full plan details on pricing before choosing the workspace for your team.
Yes. ClinicalEvidence is an OpenEvidence alternative for professionals who need cited answers from trial registries and publications. It combines sentence level NCT or PMID citations with a sortable trial table, alerts and exports. Team plans add shared seats and workspaces, without requiring a clinician NPI to sign up.
Yes. OpenEvidence is free for verified US healthcare professionals, with verification commonly tied to an NPI number. It is funded largely by pharmaceutical advertising, according to industry reporting. ClinicalEvidence uses paid subscriptions and carries no advertising, with individual and team plans available through monthly or yearly billing.
Eligibility depends on OpenEvidence's healthcare professional verification requirements, commonly tied to an NPI number. Non-physician status alone does not establish whether someone qualifies, so check eligibility directly with OpenEvidence. ClinicalEvidence requires no clinician NPI and serves pharma, medtech, CRO, consulting and academic professionals working with research evidence.
They differ in purpose and source grounding. OpenEvidence focuses on medical questions with inline citations, while ChatGPT is a general chatbot whose behavior depends on its configuration. General chatbots may invent references. Tools grounded in retrieved sources, including OpenEvidence and ClinicalEvidence, cite those sources, which professionals should still inspect.
ClinicalEvidence is a strong choice for pharma teams that need registry depth, cited answers and shared evidence work. Research Team includes shared workspaces, pooled answers and team seats, with XLSX and DOCX exports. The best fit depends on your source requirements, review process and expected workload, rather than a universal ranking.
No. ClinicalEvidence carries no advertising and uses paid subscriptions for individual professionals and teams. You can examine trial records, read cited answers and follow alerts without advertising in the tool. Medical affairs teams still apply their own compliance policies and review the underlying evidence before using a summary in their work.
Bring a current research question and inspect the cited answer alongside its trial records.
Use your work email. We send a 6 digit code to confirm it.
Already have an account?
By creating an account you agree to the Terms and the Privacy policy.
New to ClinicalEvidence?