估值 $15 billion 的 OpenEvidence,或已被醫生使用的廣告型 AI 新創
The $15 billion ad-powered AI startup your doctor may already be using
OpenEvidence 是一家估值 $15 billion、醫生可能已在使用的廣告型 AI 新創,其臨牀成效研究結果不一。Mayo Clinic 對五宗患者案例的研究稱系統提供準確、循證的建議,但對治療決策影響有限;六月刊於 Nature 的研究則發現,它在臨牀基準測試中不及 Gemini 和 GPT。醫生指出,個別 AI 工具的表現研究及臨牀部署指引仍不足,亦有人擔心初級醫生過度依賴這些系統。
“The end game is literature-based drug discovery,” Nadler said, referencing the field of data mining scientific literature for insights. “The economic value of that as a company is going to dwarf by orders of magnitude whatever we could have charged hospitals or advertisers.”
Alexander Tarashansky, the creator of Claude Science, an Anthropic platform that supports research scientists, has also joined the company to support its clinical work.
The company needs to see off competition from frontier AI companies such as OpenAI, which has also made a play for the space with ChatGPT for healthcare. Anthropic has also released healthcare tools, though it recently partnered with OpenEvidence to bring the tools to 100 low- and middle-income countries.
“The fact that doctors are adopting and using a piece of software of their own volition means there is a degree of differentiation that OpenEvidence can really lean on,” said Nworah Ayogu, a partner at investor Thrive Capital.
But analysis of OpenEvidence’s effectiveness has led to mixed results.
One study by the Mayo Clinic, an investor in the startup, found that it “provided accurate, evidence-based recommendations” in all five patient case studies that were sampled, although its impact on treatment decisions was more limited.
Other research, including a June paper published in Nature, found that it underperformed general-purpose AI models such as Google’s Gemini and OpenAI’s GPT on clinical benchmarks.
Eric Oermann, a neurosurgeon at NYU Langone, said there was a lack of research into the performance of individual AI tools and scant guidance on how to implement the tools in a clinical setting.
There are also widely held concerns that more junior doctors could fall foul by relying too heavily on OpenEvidence and other systems without first mastering basic knowledge of particular conditions and their prescribed treatment options.
“It’s a fun, friendly competitive pressure to play with benchmarks… [But] there’s no question of what AI tool physicians trust and use,” Nadler said.
Additional reporting by George Hammond in San Francisco.
© 2026 The Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved. Not to be redistributed, copied, or modified in any way.
來源:Ars Technica · AI · arstechnica.com