OpenEvidence vs Figure 1

Similar category, different focus. These tools serve overlapping but distinct needs. Comparability 65/100 Comparability is an AI-graded 0–100 score of how directly these two tools compete — higher means a more apples-to-apples comparison.

OpenEvidence

by OpenEvidence

Figure 1

by Figure 1 Inc.

AI Verdict

OpenEvidence focuses on AI-powered clinical decision support and documentation, providing referenced answers from medical literature at the point of care. Figure 1, while also offering clinical decision support, primarily serves as a community platform for healthcare professionals to collaborate on and discuss medical cases. Therefore, OpenEvidence is better suited for users needing immediate, evidence-based answers and automated documentation, while Figure 1 excels for those seeking peer-to-peer consultation and real-world case discussions.

Choose OpenEvidence if…

Choose OpenEvidence if you need immediate, evidence-based answers to clinical questions directly from peer-reviewed medical literature and guidelines. It's ideal for point-of-care decision support, especially for high-stakes decisions or when preparing for rounds and presentations, as it provides referenced summaries and can even help draft clinical documentation.

View OpenEvidence →

Choose Figure 1 if…

Choose Figure 1 if you are a healthcare professional seeking to collaborate with a large community of verified peers on challenging medical cases and images. It's best suited for real-time knowledge sharing, peer-to-peer consultation, and medical education through real-world case discussions, particularly for rare or complex presentations where diverse perspectives are valuable.

View Figure 1 →

Reviewed by Pouyan Golshani, MD — Interventional Radiologist

Quick Comparison

Feature	OpenEvidence	Figure 1
Pricing	Free	Free
Deployment	Cloud-based (web application) and mobile applications	Cloud
BAA Available	Unknown	Yes AI-estimated
FDA Status	Unknown	Not applicable AI-estimated
HIPAA	Unknown	Yes AI-estimated

Head-to-Head

AI-generated assessment across six dimensions based on each tool's documented features and compliance posture. Grounded in public data — not a substitute for hands-on evaluation.

Usability

OpenEvidence

OpenEvidence offers an AI-powered natural language question-answering interface, clinical note generation, and features like 'Dotflows' for customizable prompts, and a new voice mode for hands-free operation, which suggests a highly intuitive and efficient user experience. Figure 1, while a large community platform, focuses on case sharing and discussion, which is a different type of interaction and doesn't explicitly highlight advanced AI-driven usability features for direct clinical decision support or documentation. User experience encompasses ease of use, accessibility, and the emotional impact of using a product.

Clinical Value

OpenEvidence

OpenEvidence provides immediate, referenced answers from peer-reviewed medical literature (NEJM, JAMA, NCCN, Cochrane, PubMed) and offers real-time clinical decision support at the point of care. It also includes features like transcribing patient visits and auto-generating structured medical notes, directly enhancing clinical workflows. Figure 1 focuses on peer-to-peer collaboration and medical education through case sharing, which offers clinical value through community knowledge but not direct AI-powered decision support grounded in literature.

Pricing & Value

OpenEvidence

Both tools are free for verified healthcare professionals. However, OpenEvidence's 'free' model is supported by pharmaceutical advertising, which is transparent but could be a concern for some users. OpenEvidence also offers enterprise pricing for EHR integration and data insights, indicating a more developed value proposition for larger organizations beyond the free individual use. Figure 1's pricing details are simply 'free for healthcare professionals,' without further elaboration on enterprise models or revenue generation.

Enterprise Readiness

OpenEvidence

OpenEvidence explicitly states it has enterprise pricing models available for EHR integration (e.g., Epic at Mount Sinai Health System) and data insights subscriptions. It is HIPAA compliant and has a BAA, essential for enterprise adoption. Figure 1, while having 3 million registered members and targeting solo to large health systems, does not detail specific enterprise integration capabilities or advanced features beyond its community platform.

Innovation

OpenEvidence

OpenEvidence demonstrates strong innovation with its AI-powered natural language question answering grounded in peer-reviewed literature, real-time clinical decision support, and features like 'OpenEvidence Visits' for ambient documentation and note generation. Recent additions like voice mode, Dotflows, and Coding Intelligence further highlight its continuous innovation in AI-driven clinical workflows. Figure 1's innovation lies primarily in its large-scale peer-to-peer medical case sharing and discussion, which is valuable but less focused on cutting-edge AI application in direct clinical support.

Support & Docs

Tie

OpenEvidence provides a user guide, tutorials, customer support, and training sessions, including real-time support via chatbots. Figure 1's documentation is not explicitly detailed in the provided information, but as a large community platform, it likely has resources for its users. Without more specific information on Figure 1's support and documentation, it's difficult to definitively pick a winner.

Feature-by-Feature

Detail beyond the Quick Comparison summary. For pricing, deployment, BAA, FDA, and HIPAA see the Overview tab.

Feature	OpenEvidence	Figure 1
Name	OpenEvidence	Figure 1
Tagline	America's Official Medical Knowledge Platform	The Pulse of Medicine Today
Primary Categories	Clinical Decision Support & Reference, Documentation & Scribing	Clinical Decision Support & Reference, Medical Education & Training
Key Features (Clinical Decision Support)	AI-powered natural language question answering for clinical queries, Answers grounded in peer-reviewed medical evidence (NEJM, JAMA, NCCN, Cochrane, PubMed), Fully referenced answers with transparent sourcing to primary studies and guidelines, Clinical decision support at the point of care for high-stakes decisions	Secure platform for sharing and discussing medical cases and images, Peer-to-peer collaboration and consultation, Real-time knowledge sharing
EHR Integration	Integrates with Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems like Epic	Not specified
Documentation Features	OpenEvidence Visits: transcribe patient visits and auto-generate structured medical notes, Real-time clinical decision support integrated into documentation workflows	Not specified

Videos

Demos, reviews, and walkthroughs featuring OpenEvidence and Figure 1.

Loading videos…

Videos need JavaScript to load. Search YouTube directly →

View all on YouTube

Frequently Asked Questions

How do these tools integrate with existing EHR systems and clinical workflows?

OpenEvidence is designed to integrate with EHR systems like Epic and offers a 'Visits' feature to transcribe patient visits and auto-generate structured medical notes, aiming for real-time clinical decision support within documentation workflows. Figure 1, while focused on peer-to-peer case discussion, does not explicitly detail direct EHR integration for documentation or decision support within a physician's active workflow, but rather serves as a platform for knowledge sharing and consultation.

What is the accuracy and sensitivity of the information provided by each tool, especially for complex or rare cases?

OpenEvidence leverages AI to provide referenced answers from peer-reviewed medical literature, and a new 'EvidenceGrade' feature quantifies and visualizes the quality of evidence behind its answers. While OpenEvidence scored 100% on USMLE-type questions, some studies have reported lower accuracy (34-41%) for complex medical subspecialty scenarios. Figure 1 relies on the collective expertise of its verified healthcare professional community for case discussions and diagnoses, with images and cases manually reviewed before posting, but does not provide a stated accuracy or sensitivity metric for its crowd-sourced information.

For which medical specialties are these tools most suitable?

OpenEvidence is broadly applicable for clinical decision support and documentation across specialties such as Family Medicine, Hospital Medicine, and Internal Medicine, providing evidence-based answers for a wide range of clinical queries. Figure 1 is a community platform that supports a broader array of specialties, including Dermatology, Family Medicine, Gastroenterology, Obstetrics & Gynecology, Pediatrics, Radiology, and Rheumatology, by facilitating visual case sharing and peer-to-peer consultation.

What is the learning curve for physicians adopting these tools, and what kind of support is available?

OpenEvidence is designed to be user-friendly, allowing physicians to pose questions in natural language and receive concise, referenced summaries, with some physicians describing it as a 'massive time-saver'. OpenEvidence also offers an education platform for continuing education and Maintenance of Certification credit. Figure 1 functions similarly to a social media platform like Instagram, which may suggest a relatively intuitive interface for many users, and focuses on peer-to-peer learning through case discussions.

Beyond HIPAA, what additional security measures and audit-trail features do these platforms offer?

OpenEvidence is SOC 2 Type II certified, encrypts data in transit and at rest using industry-standard algorithms (SSL/TLS and AES-256), and maintains comprehensive security policies including incident response and vulnerability management. OpenEvidence also offers audit trails for extracted data. Figure 1 emphasizes a secure platform for sharing medical cases and images, with in-app tools for image anonymization and manual review of uploaded images, but specific details on audit-trail features or security certifications beyond HIPAA are not readily available in the provided information.

How do these tools support multi-site rollouts and what considerations are there for large healthcare systems?

OpenEvidence is actively used across more than 10,000 hospitals and medical centers nationwide and by over 40% of physicians in the United States, indicating its scalability for large-scale adoption. The platform's enterprise pricing models for EHR integration and data insights suggest it is designed to accommodate multi-site deployments. Figure 1 is a community platform with over 3 million registered members globally, suggesting it can be adopted by individual professionals within large systems, but specific features or considerations for coordinated multi-site rollouts by a single organization are not detailed.