Analyze case
The clinical lane reviews a typed case summary like a senior peer: differential, urgency, next steps, and uncertainty.
01. Clinical workspace
Three-lane clinical intelligence
OpenMED
Open Medical Evidence and Decisions: key in a de-identified case summary for a senior-peer style second opinion, patient conversation, and research trail in one calm clinical workspace.
Typed summaries only. No image or document uploads. Clinical decision support for licensed professionals, not a substitute for independent medical judgment, emergency care, or local policy.
OpenMED artifact
02. Live review structure
Typed case review, patient language, research trail
01
Analyze case
Differential, severity, actions
Differential ranked
Red flags surfaced
Next steps staged
Output
Clinician-ready plan
02
Patient communication
Plain language, risks, follow-up
Plain-language summary
Risk framing
Follow-up script
Output
Patient-ready explanation
03
Research angle
Sources, trials, safety labels
Claims checked
Gaps identified
Sources attached
Output
Auditable evidence trail
01. CASE
Differential + next action
02. PATIENT
Plain-language plan
03. RESEARCH
Evidence report card
The gap OpenMED is built for
Not just an answer. A trail you can audit.
The product is shaped around traceability: every recommendation should expose the question, the sources, the uncertainty, and the patient-facing explanation.
Prepare communication
The patient lane turns the same clinical reasoning into plain-language explanation and next-step instructions.
Review research
The research lane connects recommendations to literature, trials, labels, and a second-pass evidence critique.
Evidence network
From literature search to clinical context.
PubMed literatureLive
Clinical trial registryLive
Current drug labelsLive
FDA safety sectionsLive
Guideline scoutLive
Partner-ready searchLive
Trust layer
Designed to be checked, challenged, and cited.
Clinicians do not need another confident black box. OpenMED is built around source visibility, patient communication, and reviewable decisions.
Evidence you can inspect
Citations, source metadata, and retrieval history keep recommendations connected to the literature behind them.
Reasoning that shows its work
Answers separate immediate action, uncertainty, contraindications, and follow-up questions so clinicians can challenge the path.
Built for clinical review
Typed summaries, PHI checks, explicit limitations, and no image/document uploads keep the workflow useful without pretending to replace judgment.
Ready to test OpenMED with real clinical workflows?
Start with a transparent evidence workflow today; expand into verified partnerships and institutional review as usage grows.