OpenEvidence vs CardioGenetics
Price, ratings, monetisation and update history for both apps, side by side — with what reviewers say about each.
OpenEvidence
This app provides healthcare professionals with evidence-based clinical decision support and medical information. It acts as a search engine, sourcing answers from peer-reviewed literature and leading medical organizations to aid in high-stakes medical decisions at the point of care.
- Clinical decision support
- Medical search engine
- Sourced from peer-reviewed literature
- FDA and CDC data integration
- Partnerships with leading medical journals
- Verified healthcare professional access
Read full descriptionHide full description
Clinical Decision Support & Medical Search Engine for Healthcare Professionals (NPI Required) OpenEvidence is the most widely used clinical decision support platform and medical search engine among U.S. clinicians. According to independent studies, more American physicians use OpenEvidence than all other AI platforms combined. OpenEvidence is trusted by millions of verified healthcare professionals to make high-stakes clinical decisions at the point of care with answers that are sourced, cited, and grounded in peer-reviewed medical literature. Founded with the mission to organize and expand the world's collective medical knowledge, OpenEvidence is actively used daily by the majority of physicians in the United States. OpenEvidence is free for all verified U.S. clinicians. AN OFFICIAL AI PARTNER OF: The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and its 11 specialty journals National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Nature Cochrane Library Wiley WHAT YOU GET: • Specific answers to clinical questions, with every claim cited to its source • 35 million+ peer-reviewed papers, 300+ medical journals, plus FDA and CDC sources • Licensed full text from NEJM, JAMA, Nature, Cochrane, and others • EvidenceGrade™: see the strength of the evidence behind every answer • CME and MOC credits, earned by asking questions • Visits for ambient documentation, Dialer for secure patient calls, and Voice Mode for hands-free answers CONTENT AGREEMENTS AND COLLABORATIONS: American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) American College of Cardiology (ACC) American Diabetes Association (ADA) American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) ASCO Guidelines American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) American Urological Association (AUA) Plus AAO-HNS, GINA, SNO, SSO, and more. IN USE ACROSS: 10,000+ hospitals and medical centers nationwide, including Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai, Cedars-Sinai, MSKCC, and Sutter Health. WHY CLINICIANS TRUST US: • HIPAA compliant across the platform • NEJM, JAMA, Nature, and NCCN—official content partners • Tens of millions of clinical consultations per month WHAT CLINICIANS SAY: “OpenEvidence is currently the best AI tool for medical information.” — Dr. Paul Sax, Infectious Disease, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Review in The New England Journal of Medicine Journal Watch (now NEJM Clinician) “In a morning report, a resident had a question that I didn’t know the answer to, but we were able to open OpenEvidence and get an answer on the spot.” — Dr. Kyle P. Lehenbauer, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center “I use OpenEvidence multiple times during the day and every day. I am a better doc because of this. I expand my differential diagnoses and verify the science behind choices of treatments.” — Dr. Sharon E. Martin, Southern Huntingdon Medical Center Important note: OpenEvidence is available only to healthcare professionals. Users must verify their healthcare professional status before using OpenEvidence.
CardioGenetics
This medical app provides healthcare professionals with validated calculators, diagnostic frameworks, and a clinical trial finder for inherited cardiomyopathies. It offers evidence-based risk stratification aligned with current guidelines, supporting clinical decision-making at the bedside and in conference.
- Validated risk calculators
- Diagnostic frameworks
- Clinical trial finder
- Guideline-linked evidence
- Gene-specific risk assessment
- ASCVD risk calculation
Read full descriptionHide full description
Every inherited cardiomyopathy evaluation warrants meticulous, accurate, and evidence-based risk stratification. CardioGenetics compiles validated calculators, diagnostic frameworks, and a live clinical trial finder in your pocket. USED AT THE BEDSIDE Whether you are presenting at a multidisciplinary cardiomyopathy board, interpreting a new pathogenic variant, or seeing your first LMNA patient, CardioGenetics gives the same tools with the evidence and models behind every number. ASCVD RISK ALIGNED WITH THE 2026 GUIDELINES Calculate 10-year risk with AHA PREVENT (ages 30–79), compare against the legacy Pooled Cohort Equations, integrate coronary artery calcium via the MESA score, and interpret Lipoprotein(a) with a built-in risk multiplier. Every result maps directly to the 2026 ACC/AHA dyslipidemia guideline statin thresholds, risk-enhancing factors, and CAC decision pathways. GENE-SPECIFIC SUDDEN CARDIAC DEATH RISK Not all cardiomyopathies carry the same arrhythmic risk. CardioGenetics includes dedicated calculators for HCM (ESC 2014 Risk-SCD), ARVC (Cadrin-Tourigny), LMNA (Wahbi, ESC 2023-adapted), PLN p.Arg14del (Verstraelen), DSP (ERADOS, Eur Heart J 2024), FLNC (Gigli, JAMA Cardiol 2025), and PKP2-specific guidance. Each cross-referenced to the latest ESC 2023 and AHA/ACC 2024 guidelines. DIAGNOSTIC FRAMEWORKS AT YOUR FINGERTIPS Confirm diagnoses before you risk-stratify. Built-in criteria include the 2020 Padua Criteria for arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy, AHA/ACC 2024 and ESC 2023 HCM diagnostic standards, LVNC scoring (Jenni, Petersen, Stöllberger), and DCM phenotyping. FIND THE RIGHT CLINICAL TRIAL Browse actively enrolling studies for Lp(a), HCM, ACM/ARVC, DSP, LMNA, and PLN with interactive U.S. state and European enrollment maps. Every trial includes its NCT identifier and a direct link to ClinicalTrials.gov. DESIGNED FOR WHAT WE ACTUALLY DO IN CLINIC • Search any calculator, diagnosis, or trial from a single search bar • Tap a risk score and see the full mathematical model, original citation, and DOI • View sensitivity analyses and interactive risk curves • Share lay-language summaries during patient-facing discussions • Cross-navigate between diagnostic confirmation and risk stratification in one tap TRUST BUT VERIFY: Every calculator reproduces its published equation with full variable definitions and baseline coefficients. There are no "black boxes" here, no proprietary modifications. Tap any citation to access the original published manuscript. INTENDED USERS: Cardiologists · Electrophysiologists · Genetic Counselors · Cardiology Fellows and Residents · Medical Students · Advanced Practice Providers · Inherited Cardiovascular Disease Teams Developed by Mark E. Pepin, MD, PhD, FESC. All risk models are derived from peer-reviewed literature and their original sources. This app is a clinical decision-support aid for healthcare professionals and does not replace clinical judgment, institutional protocols, or shared decision-making. Not FDA-cleared or CE-marked.
Screenshots
Verdict
The clearest difference is price: OpenEvidence at Free against CardioGenetics's $2.99. OpenEvidence also leads on update cadence (weekly vs every 5 months) and ratings volume (12K vs 4). CardioGenetics's advantage is review sentiment (100% vs 81%). On rating, ads, in-app purchases and device support there is nothing between them.
Scored on Price · Rating · Positive reviews · Number of ratings · Update frequency · Ads · In-app purchases · Monetization · Best chart rank · Devices · Requires iOS
OpenEvidence is free to download; CardioGenetics costs $2.99 up front. Neither carries in-app purchases, so what you see is what you pay.
On the App Store both sit at effectively the same score — 4.9 for OpenEvidence against 5.0 for CardioGenetics. That said, the two scores are not equally well evidenced: OpenEvidence has 12K ratings behind it against 4, so its average is the more settled of the two. Written reviews are what separate them: 81% of OpenEvidence's written reviews are positive against 100% of CardioGenetics's.
OpenEvidence ships an update weekly, CardioGenetics every 5 months. The most recent releases landed on October 23, 2026 and September 23, 2026 respectively.
| Parameter | OpenEvidence | CardioGenetics |
|---|---|---|
| Price | Free — better | $2.99 |
| Rating | 4.9 (12K ratings) | 5.0 (4 ratings) — better |
| Positive reviews | 81.0% of reviews | 100.0% of reviews — better |
| Number of ratings | 12K — better | 4 |
| Update frequency | Weekly — better | Every 5 months |
| Ads | No | No |
| In-app purchases | No | No |
| Monetization | Free — better | Paid |
| Best chart rank | #32 — better | — |
| Devices | iPhone, iPad, iPod — better | iPhone, iPad |
| Requires iOS | 15.1 — better | 17.0 |
| Further details — not scored | ||
| Size | 95 MB | 6 MB |
| Age rating | +17 | 4+ |
| Developer | OpenEvidence Inc. | MARK EMILE PEPIN |
Customer experience
OpenEvidence
CardioGenetics
Bugs and requests
OpenEvidence
Reported bugs
1 issue- App not working in latest update
Requested features
2 requests- Availability on MacBook
- Integration with clinical workflows and EMRs
CardioGenetics
Not enough reviews yet to summarise bugs or requests.
In-app purchases
OpenEvidence
No in-app purchases
CardioGenetics
No in-app purchases
Questions
Is OpenEvidence free?
Is CardioGenetics free?
Which has better reviews, OpenEvidence or CardioGenetics?
Do OpenEvidence or CardioGenetics have ads?
Which is updated more often, OpenEvidence or CardioGenetics?
Other comparisons















