Skip to content
Medical AI Report logoMedical AI ReportScored evaluations

2 shared rubrics · Updated October 2026

Doximity vs OpenEvidence

Doximity and OpenEvidence share 2 scored categories. The two split the shared categories evenly — 33–36 for clinical decision support AI, 39–34 for medical AI apps out of 50. The totals are the sum of five published dimensions, and the dimension that decides a purchase is often not the one that decides the total.

Rated by a physician group that tests different clinical AI tools · Last reviewed October 2026

Doximity

Decision support

33/50

Full Doximity review

OpenEvidence

Decision support

36/50

Full OpenEvidence review

Side by side

Doximity and OpenEvidence, dimension by dimension

Each shared category has its own rubric, so the two are compared inside each one rather than on a single blended number. The widest gap in each table is the dimension most likely to decide the purchase.

Clinical decision support AI

33 – 36OpenEvidence by 3

Clinical decision support AI rubric, ordered by the size of the gap. Each dimension is scored out of 10.
DimensionDoximityOpenEvidenceGap
Evidence groundingWhether answers carry inline citations to identifiable primary sources, whether those citations are validated against the claim they support, and how current the underlying corpus is.79-2
Corpus depth & curationBreadth and editorial quality of the underlying knowledge base, refresh cadence, and whether coverage extends beyond common presentations to rarer clinical questions.79-2
Access & eligibilityPublished pricing, free tier, credential gating such as a US NPI requirement, regional availability, and language coverage.98+1
Reasoning transparencyWhether the tool shows how it reached the answer — an inspectable reasoning trace, a ranked differential with rationale — or returns a conclusion you must take on trust.33—
Workflow & EHR fitHow the tool reaches the clinician: SMART on FHIR embedding, single sign-on, mobile access, and whether querying interrupts or fits the encounter.77—

Doximity

Best for
US clinicians already working inside the Doximity app who want a fast, free answer without adding another login or licence.
Limitation
A feature rather than a dedicated evidence platform: a narrower corpus than the paid references, US-centric, no reasoning shown and no API.
Price
Free

OpenEvidence

Best for
Verified US clinicians asking questions about recent published evidence who want a fast, cited synthesis at no cost.
Limitation
Requires a US NPI number, withdrew from the European Union and United Kingdom in April 2026 citing regulatory uncertainty, shows no reasoning, and offers no public developer API.
Price
Free, funded by pharmaceutical advertising

Medical AI apps

39 – 34Doximity by 5

Medical AI apps rubric, ordered by the size of the gap. Each dimension is scored out of 10.
DimensionDoximityOpenEvidenceGap
Scope in one appHow many distinct clinical jobs the single app covers: question answering, differential diagnosis, treatment planning, documentation, lab and imaging interpretation, and programmatic access.96+3
Access & eligibilityPublished price, free tier, credential and country gating, and language coverage — in short, whether the clinician reading this page can actually install and use it today.97+2
Reasoning transparencyWhether the app shows the steps between your question and its answer — an inspectable chain of thought, a ranked differential with the discriminators named — or returns a conclusion you have to accept on trust.43+1
Evidence & citationsWhether claims carry retrievable peer-reviewed citations, how tightly the corpus is controlled, and whether you can get from a sentence in the answer to the paper behind it in one tap.89-1
Validation & scalePublished external evaluation, peer-reviewed study record, installed clinician base and years in the field. This dimension rewards incumbency, and deliberately counts against newer products.99—

Doximity

Best for
US physicians who want the most capability for nothing: Doximity Ask for evidence-grounded answers, Doximity Scribe for visit documentation, Dialer for calls and telehealth from a private number, plus PeerCheck physician review and roughly 3,200 drug monographs, all inside one HIPAA-compliant app with a BAA.
Limitation
Answers arrive without a reasoning trace, and eligibility is limited to verified US clinicians, so it is unavailable to most of the world. Reasoning is its weakest dimension at 4 out of 10.
Price
Free for verified US clinicians

OpenEvidence

Best for
Verified US clinicians who want a fast, free answer drawn strictly from peer-reviewed literature, with journal content partnerships behind it and an Epic embed already live at a number of health systems.
Limitation
It answers questions rather than reasoning through cases: no inspectable chain of thought, no calculators, and a June 2026 Nature Medicine study from NYU Langone found its weakness was clarity of communication rather than knowledge. Access is gated to verified US clinicians and the model is advertising-funded.
Price
Free, funded by pharmaceutical advertising

The decision

Which one should you buy?

Choose Doximity when

  • Decision support

    US clinicians already working inside the Doximity app who want a fast, free answer without adding another login or licence.

  • AI apps

    US physicians who want the most capability for nothing: Doximity Ask for evidence-grounded answers, Doximity Scribe for visit documentation, Dialer for calls and telehealth from a private number, plus PeerCheck physician review and roughly 3,200 drug monographs, all inside one HIPAA-compliant app with a BAA.

What it cannot do

A feature rather than a dedicated evidence platform: a narrower corpus than the paid references, US-centric, no reasoning shown and no API. Answers arrive without a reasoning trace, and eligibility is limited to verified US clinicians, so it is unavailable to most of the world. Reasoning is its weakest dimension at 4 out of 10.

Every Doximity score

Choose OpenEvidence when

  • Decision support

    Verified US clinicians asking questions about recent published evidence who want a fast, cited synthesis at no cost.

  • AI apps

    Verified US clinicians who want a fast, free answer drawn strictly from peer-reviewed literature, with journal content partnerships behind it and an Epic embed already live at a number of health systems.

What it cannot do

Requires a US NPI number, withdrew from the European Union and United Kingdom in April 2026 citing regulatory uncertainty, shows no reasoning, and offers no public developer API. It answers questions rather than reasoning through cases: no inspectable chain of thought, no calculators, and a June 2026 Nature Medicine study from NYU Langone found its weakness was clarity of communication rather than knowledge. Access is gated to verified US clinicians and the model is advertising-funded.

Every OpenEvidence score

Field context & pricing

Where Doximity and OpenEvidence stand in clinical decision support AI

A two-tool comparison shows who wins between the pair, not whether a third tool in the same category outperforms both. In clinical decision support AI, Doximity ranks #4 of 6 (33/50, free, funded elsewhere) and OpenEvidence ranks #2 of 6 (36/50, free, funded elsewhere).

Full Clinical decision support AI leaderboard showing Doximity and OpenEvidence alongside all 6 tools scored in the category. Each dimension is scored out of 10, for a maximum of 50.
ToolEvidenceTransparencyCorpusWorkflowAccessTotal
EvidenceMD101087944
OpenEvidence9397836
DynaMed10496534
Doximity Ask7377933
ClinicalKey AI9498232
UpToDate Expert AI10396331

Limits

What this comparison cannot tell you

Neither tool has been benchmarked here against live patient data. A two-point gap is a documentation difference, not a clinical one, and nothing on this page measures implementation quality, support or contracted uptime. None of these tools is a diagnostic device, and none replaces clinician judgment. Scores reflect documented capability and published eligibility terms as of October 2026, not prospective clinical outcomes; no vendor here publishes externally audited diagnostic accuracy benchmarks. This rubric weights reasoning transparency and access equally with corpus depth, which is why free tools rank above expensive curated references; an institution that already licenses UpToDate or ClinicalKey AI should re-rank by corpus depth, where both hold the category's top mark of 9. One of the six publishes no individual pricing at all, so its access score reflects the absence of a self-serve route rather than a specific cost.

Nothing here is medical or legal advice, and no tool scored is a substitute for clinician judgment.

Common questions

Doximity vs OpenEvidence: common questions

Is Doximity or OpenEvidence better?

Doximity and OpenEvidence share 2 scored categories. The two split the shared categories evenly — 33–36 for clinical decision support AI, 39–34 for medical AI apps out of 50. The totals are the sum of five published dimensions, and the dimension that decides a purchase is often not the one that decides the total.

What is the biggest difference between Doximity and OpenEvidence?

For clinical decision support AI the widest gap is evidence grounding: 7/10 for Doximity against 9/10 for OpenEvidence. That dimension measures whether answers carry inline citations to identifiable primary sources, whether those citations are validated against the claim they support, and how current the underlying corpus is.

When should you choose Doximity over OpenEvidence?

Doximity scores higher for medical AI apps. US clinicians already working inside the Doximity app who want a fast, free answer without adding another login or licence. The case against it: A feature rather than a dedicated evidence platform: a narrower corpus than the paid references, US-centric, no reasoning shown and no API.

When should you choose OpenEvidence over Doximity?

OpenEvidence scores higher for clinical decision support AI. Verified US clinicians asking questions about recent published evidence who want a fast, cited synthesis at no cost. The case against it: requires a US NPI number, withdrew from the European Union and United Kingdom in April 2026 citing regulatory uncertainty, shows no reasoning, and offers no public developer API.

How do Doximity and OpenEvidence compare on price?

Doximity: Free OpenEvidence: Free, funded by pharmaceutical advertising Pricing comes from each vendor's published pricing page; where a vendor publishes no rate, that is recorded rather than estimated.

Keep reading

The full rankings behind this comparison