Consensus vs OpenEvidence
A side-by-side comparison of Consensus and OpenEvidence, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
OpenEvidence
HealthcareAn AI medical search engine that answers clinical questions with cited evidence.
View OpenEvidenceAt a glance
| Attribute | Consensus | OpenEvidence |
|---|---|---|
| Category (differs) | Research | Healthcare |
| Pricing (differs) | FREEMIUM | FREE |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Deployment | Cloud | Cloud |
| Platforms | Web, iOS | Web, iOS |
| Model support (differs) | Multi-model | — |
| Vendor (differs) | Consensus | OpenEvidence |
The honest brief
Consensus
Consensus Meter aggregates whether papers agree or disagree on a question, beyond surfacing individual citations.
- 200M+ peer-reviewed corpus
- Copilot drafts literature reviews
- Inline citations on answers
- Best answers behind paid tier
- Coverage skews to indexed journals
- Not for non-academic questions
OpenEvidence
Official AI partner of NEJM and JAMA, so answers cite journal-grade licensed evidence other clinical search tools can't access.
- Free for verified U.S. clinicians
- Licensed NEJM/JAMA content partnerships
- Answers cite primary evidence
- Wide adoption among U.S. physicians
- Verified-clinician gate to access
- Weak at targeted author/journal lookups
- Curation process is opaque
- Overreliance risk for trainees