Developer APIOpenAI-Compatible Clinical Reasoning API
One API for all healthcare needs. Powered by advanced medical chain-of-thought reasoning, trained on peer-reviewed literature, and designed for evidence-based clinical decisions.
Stop using generic AI. EvidenceMD understands medicine.
How EvidenceMD compares to leading AI models on specialized reasoning tasks
Medical Reasoning
EvidenceMD AI API94%
GPT 5.283%
Claude 4.5 Opus76%
Google AI70%
Medical / Insurance administrative Reasoning
EvidenceMD AI API90%
GPT 5.280%
Claude 4.5 Opus75%
Google AI70%
Side by side
See the Difference: Real Clinical Reasoning
EvidenceMD delivers structured, evidence-based responses with citations from peer-reviewed sources.
Feature
EvidenceMD
OpenAI
Claude
Gemini
Citations & Sources
Peer-Reviewed Information
Clinical Reasoning
Biomedical Reasoning
EvidenceMD API Response
User Query:
"What's the treatment plan for aortic thoracic aneurysm 5.9cm in dialysis patient?"
EvidenceMD Response:
Executive Summary: Treatment Plan for 5.9 cm Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm in Dialysis Patient
The treatment plan requires a critical balance between the imminent risk of aortic rupture/dissection and the significantly elevated perioperative mortality associated with renal failure.
Immediate Recommendation:
A 5.9 cm TAA exceeds the standard intervention threshold of 5.5 cm established by the 2022 ACC/AHA Guidelines[1]. The management strategy must prioritize Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) over open surgery if anatomically feasible.
1. Indication for Intervention:
Size Thresholds: Intervention at ≥5.5 cm per guidelines [1]
Critical Point: Sharp increase in dissection risk at 6.0 cm [26]
Dialysis Mortality: 30-day mortality ~17% for TEVAR [19]
2. Procedural Approach:
TEVAR preferred for descending TAA in high-risk patients [3]
Lower perioperative morbidity vs open repair [6]
30-day survival 85.7% in dialysis patients [10]
Sources (8 peer-reviewed citations):
[1] ACC/AHA Guidelines 2022 - ahajournals.org
[3] SVS Guidelines - jvascsurg.org
[6] Ann Thorac Surg - annalsthoracicsurgery.org
[10] PMC Study - pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
[19] JTCVS - jtcvs.org
[26] PubMed Study - pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Real API response with inline citations and peer-reviewed sources
Use cases
One API for All Healthcare Needs
Built for developers building the future of healthcare
Clinical documentation, SOAP notes, EHR integration
Wellness & Longevity
Diet, nutrition, fitness, preventive health apps
Example prompts
Steer the Same Endpoint With a System Prompt
Add a system message and one endpoint drafts an appeal, a prior authorization, a specialist answer, or a plain-language explanation. Every example here runs as-is in the dashboard playground.
Insurance denial appeal
Turn a denial into a formal, evidence-backed appeal letter.
Pro
system
Act as a medical necessity appeals specialist. Draft a formal appeal letter contesting an insurance denial. Lead with the clinical summary, then the guideline and peer-reviewed evidence establishing medical necessity, then a direct request for reconsideration. Support every clinical claim with a citation.
user
Draft an insurance denial appeal for a 54-year-old woman with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer whose trastuzumab deruxtecan was denied as not medically necessary after progression on trastuzumab plus pertuzumab.
Clinical reasoning for all medical questions
Specialist-level answer for any medical question, written for a treating clinician.
Deep
system
Act as a clinical reasoning expert and answer any medical question. Write for a practicing clinician: precise terminology, relevant clinical context, guideline references, and an explicit statement of how strong the evidence is and where uncertainty remains.
user
For a patient with stage III unresectable NSCLC who has completed concurrent chemoradiation, what is the current evidence for consolidation durvalumab, and how should PD-L1 status change the decision?
Prior authorization request
Payer-ready request documenting medical necessity.
Pro
system
Act as a prior authorization specialist. Draft a concise prior authorization request that documents the diagnosis, the therapies already tried and their outcomes, the clinical rationale for the requested therapy, and the guideline basis. Include only what a payer reviewer needs to approve it.
user
Draft a prior authorization request for semaglutide for a 47-year-old man with type 2 diabetes, BMI 34, and HbA1c 8.6% on maximum-dose metformin who did not tolerate empagliflozin.
Patient-friendly explanation
Plain-language answer that keeps the evidence intact.
Fast
system
Act as patient friendly evidence based reasoning expert. Explain at roughly an eighth-grade reading level, define any term you cannot avoid, and keep every clinical fact accurate. Describe what the evidence shows in plain words and do not give individual medical advice.
user
Explain to a newly diagnosed patient what atrial fibrillation is, why blood thinners are usually recommended, and what the bleeding risk actually means for them.
Differential and workup
Ranked differential with the workup in order.
Deep
system
Act as medical reasoning expert and provide detailed response. Give a ranked differential diagnosis with the findings that discriminate between the leading possibilities, then the initial workup in the order you would order it, then the red flags that would change management.
user
A 32-year-old woman presents with three weeks of fatigue, migratory joint pain, and a photosensitive facial rash. CBC is normal apart from a mild anemia. What is the differential and the initial workup?
Default system prompt
Omit the system message and the API answers with its own clinical default. The playground starts from Act as medical reasoning expert and provide detailed response so you always have a known baseline to edit.
Advantages of EvidenceMD
Around 40% cheaper than rebuilding this on Opus 5 or GPT-5.6
Flat pricing per request, evidence retrieval included, no prompt engineering to maintain, and reasoning tuned for US insurance and utilization review — the parts a general model leaves to you.
Predictable unit cost
$0.20 flat per request on fast and pro, $0.25 on deep — no reasoning-token surprises.
Evidence, not recall
Live retrieval with peer-reviewed citations and a sources array you can store and audit.
No prompt engineering
Clinical structure and citation format are pre-tuned. Send the bare question and ship.
US payer logic built in
Prior authorization, medical necessity, two-midnight rule, and the Medicare appeals ladder.
Response includes inline citations [1], [2] with source URLs and a References section — all embedded in the content. Every response includes an x-request-id header for tracing.
How EvidenceMD transforms clinical decision-making with AI-powered evidence synthesis
Chain-of-Thought Reasoning
Our model follows clinical reasoning patterns - from differential diagnosis to treatment planning, mimicking how physicians think through complex cases.
Real-Time Evidence Synthesis
Automatically retrieves and synthesizes evidence from peer-reviewed journals, clinical guidelines, and medical databases for every query.
Specialty-Aware Responses
Trained across 30+ medical specialties with understanding of specialty-specific guidelines, terminology, and treatment protocols.
Verifiable Citations
Every clinical claim is backed by inline citations from trusted sources - no hallucinations, no made-up references.
Enterprise API
HIPAA compliant, with zero retention of your prompts and responses and no training on your data. Talk to us about a BAA, raised rate limits, and volume pricing.
HIPAA compliantZero retentionNo training on your dataSOC 2 Type II in progress
