Prescribing Caution: A Critique of <scp>OpenEvidence</scp> to Answer Medication‐Related Questions

OpenEvidence is a newer medical large language model (LLM) that is growing in use among health professionals and students for clinical care and research. This paper provides an overview of existing literature on the accuracy of using OpenEvidence to answer clinical questions. Given the limited research exploring OpenEvidence's answers to clinical or medication-related questions from a pharmacist's perspective, this paper presents two illustrative examples that highlight inaccuracies of OpenEvidence's responses and source summarization errors related to pharmacotherapeutic content. The authors also offer suggestions for the responsible use of this tool, acknowledging that its adoption by pharmacists and health care professionals is likely to expand.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
JACCP JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CLINICAL PHARMACY
Published
2026-06-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.70237
Primary Topic
Topic Modeling
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Prescribing Caution: A Critique of OpenEvidence to Answer Medication‐Related Questions

Susan Vandagriff, Lia Vellardita, Leslie Christensen, Jessica Bergsbaken et al.
JACCP JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CLINICAL PHARMACY
Topic Modeling
article

Prescribing Caution: A Critique of OpenEvidence to Answer Medication‐Related Questions

Susan Vandagriff, Lia Vellardita, Leslie Christensen, Jessica Bergsbaken, Paije Wilson
article en

Abstract

OpenEvidence is a newer medical large language model (LLM) that is growing in use among health professionals and students for clinical care and research. This paper provides an overview of existing literature on the accuracy of using OpenEvidence to answer clinical questions. Given the limited research exploring OpenEvidence's answers to clinical or medication-related questions from a pharmacist's perspective, this paper presents two illustrative examples that highlight inaccuracies of OpenEvidence's responses and source summarization errors related to pharmacotherapeutic content. The authors also offer suggestions for the responsible use of this tool, acknowledging that its adoption by pharmacists and health care professionals is likely to expand.

JACCP JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CLINICAL PHARMACYVol. 9(7)
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US), University of Wisconsin Health (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Topic Modeling
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Prescribing Caution: A Critique of <scp>OpenEvidence</scp> to Answer Medication‐Related Questions — Susan Vandagriff, Lia Vellardita, et al. · JACCP JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CLINICAL PHARMACY (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS