OpenEvidence is a semantic search and clinical decision support platform used by nearly half of U.S. doctors, designed to route physicians to authoritative sources like Phase III trials rather than generate answers

"Physician would need to spend on average nine hours a day just reading the top 10% of peer reviewed medical literature just in their own discipline"

"Clinical decision making [...] is unquestionably the highest stakes area of medicine"

"Doctors are consumers and people. And what I realized is no one had ever treated doctors that way before. Doctors were just kind of treated as these appendages of health systems."

"That is going to more or less invert where the continuing medical education is going to be the majority of medical education"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTnoAM-BvUs

Sarah Guo:

Daniel, thanks for doing this.

Daniel Nadler:

Happy to be here.

Sarah Guo:

So give us a sense of this incredibly viral sensation that has been open evidence in terms of what type of coverage it has of American doctors today?

Daniel Nadler:

As much as we would like to think that it's going especially well for us, I would sort of say as a qualifying point that in all of the sub industries of AI you're seeing an acceleration in compression. So the adoption cycles even outside of open evidence before we get to open evidence in other fields of knowledge work and coding and so on are hyper compressed. It used to take half a decade or a decade for something to become standard and now it seems to happen in two years or a year. So the same thing's happened with open evidence. In about eighteen months it's become the operating system for clinical knowledge in The United States.

It is used something like 20 times more than the next most used platform of any kind in our specific segment which is high stakes clinical decision support for doctors. So high stakes clinical decision support for doctors is a specific category of medicine. It's distinct from say paperwork or it's distinct from scribing. Those things are part of the workflow of being a doctor but the stakes and the consequences are different. If you get it wrong you can go back and do it again.

That's not the case with a patient. You have to get it right. You have one shot to get it right. And so clinical decision making, of which clinical decision support is in service of, is unquestionably the highest stakes area of medicine. We're probably the only company working at the tip of that sphere.

Most people have self selected themselves out of the problem of high stakes clinical decision making, certainly through an AI lens, because they view it as ambitious.

Elad Gil: