---
title: "Clinical decision support platforms: Which brands are most popular in search?"
description: "Compare the platforms clinicians check decisions against. Share of Search among UpToDate, Elsevier, Isabel, Wolters Kluwer and BMJ Best Practice, the clinical decision support platforms Brandwave compares worldwide, using the same methodology, market, and reporting period. Branded searches tell you how often people look for a brand by name or related terms. Comparing these searches across competitors helps you see how popular each brand is over time."
canonical: "https://gobrandwave.com/demand/global-en/categories/clinical-decision-support-platforms"
publisher: "Brandwave"
---

# Clinical decision support platforms: Which brands are most popular in search?

Compare the platforms clinicians check decisions against. Share of Search among UpToDate, Elsevier, Isabel, Wolters Kluwer and BMJ Best Practice, the clinical decision support platforms Brandwave compares worldwide, using the same methodology, market, and reporting period. Branded searches tell you how often people look for a brand by name or related terms. Comparing these searches across competitors helps you see how popular each brand is over time.

## Key facts

- **Competitive set**: Clinical decision support platforms
- **Market**: Global
- **Brands compared**: 5
- **Month measured**: Aug 2026
- **Highest Share of Search**: UpToDate, 62%

## Which brand is most popular in search among clinical decision support platforms worldwide?

- In August 2026, UpToDate was the most searched among clinical decision support platforms worldwide, with an estimated 1M branded searches and 62% estimated Share of Search within this set.
- Elsevier is in 2nd place, 43.3 percentage points behind at 18.7% Share of Search.
- Across the 11 months ending August 2026, UpToDate’s estimated Share of Search among clinical decision support platforms worldwide decreased from 65% to 62%.
- Across the 11 months ending August 2026, Elsevier’s estimated Share of Search among clinical decision support platforms worldwide decreased from 19.6% to 18.7%.
- Across the 11 months ending August 2026, Isabel’s estimated Share of Search among clinical decision support platforms worldwide increased from 7.2% to 10.2%.
- Across the 11 months ending August 2026, Wolters Kluwer’s estimated Share of Search among clinical decision support platforms worldwide increased from 7.2% to 8.4%.
- Across the 11 months ending August 2026, UpToDate’s estimated Share of Search among clinical decision support platforms worldwide peaked at 65.4% in June 2026 and was lowest at 60.4% in February 2026.
- Across the 11 months ending August 2026, Elsevier’s estimated Share of Search among clinical decision support platforms worldwide peaked at 19.6% in October 2025 and was lowest at 15.8% in July 2026.
- Across the 11 months ending August 2026, Isabel’s estimated Share of Search among clinical decision support platforms worldwide peaked at 10.6% in July 2026 and was lowest at 7% in March 2026.
- Across the 11 months ending August 2026, Wolters Kluwer’s estimated Share of Search among clinical decision support platforms worldwide peaked at 12.1% in February 2026 and was lowest at 7.1% in November 2025.
- Across the 11 months ending August 2026, BMJ Best Practice held steady: its estimated Share of Search among clinical decision support platforms worldwide moved less than 0.5 percentage points.

## Compare search popularity between leading brands

- [UpToDate vs Elsevier: compare search popularity](/demand/global-en/compare/elsevier-vs-uptodate): 62% against 18.7% Share of Search.
- [UpToDate vs Isabel: compare search popularity](/demand/global-en/compare/isabel-vs-uptodate): 62% against 10.2% Share of Search.
- [UpToDate vs Wolters Kluwer: compare search popularity](/demand/global-en/compare/uptodate-vs-wolters-kluwer): 62% against 8.4% Share of Search.
- [Elsevier vs Isabel: compare search popularity](/demand/global-en/compare/elsevier-vs-isabel): 18.7% against 10.2% Share of Search.
- [Elsevier vs Wolters Kluwer: compare search popularity](/demand/global-en/compare/elsevier-vs-wolters-kluwer): 18.7% against 8.4% Share of Search.
- [Isabel vs Wolters Kluwer: compare search popularity](/demand/global-en/compare/isabel-vs-wolters-kluwer): 10.2% against 8.4% Share of Search.

## How did search popularity change for clinical decision support platforms worldwide in August 2026?

- In August 2026, Elsevier gained estimated Share of Search among clinical decision support platforms worldwide, from 15.8% to 18.7%.
- In August 2026, UpToDate lost estimated Share of Search among clinical decision support platforms worldwide, from 64.2% to 62%.
- Estimated monthly branded searches for Isabel worldwide rose 22.2% over 11 measured months, from 135K to 165K in August 2026.
- Estimated monthly branded searches for BMJ Best Practice worldwide fell 33.1% over 11 measured months, from 18.1K to 12.1K in August 2026.

## Share of Search ranking

| Rank | Brand | Share of Search | Estimated monthly branded searches | Change vs prior month | Owned by |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | UpToDate | 62% | 1M | 0.0% | UpToDate |
| 2 | Elsevier | 18.7% | 301K | +22.4% | Elsevier |
| 3 | Isabel | 10.2% | 165K | 0.0% | Isabel |
| 4 | Wolters Kluwer | 8.4% | 135K | 0.0% | Wolters Kluwer |
| 5 | BMJ Best Practice | 0.75% | 12.1K | 0.0% | BMJ Best Practice |

## Historical estimated branded-search demand

| Month | Brand | Estimated monthly branded searches | Share of Search | Rank |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Oct 2025 | UpToDate | 1.2M | 65% | 1 |
| Oct 2025 | Elsevier | 368K | 19.6% | 2 |
| Oct 2025 | Isabel | 135K | 7.2% | 3 |
| Oct 2025 | Wolters Kluwer | 135K | 7.2% | 4 |
| Oct 2025 | BMJ Best Practice | 18.1K | 0.96% | 5 |
| Nov 2025 | UpToDate | 1.2M | 64.1% | 1 |
| Nov 2025 | Elsevier | 368K | 19.3% | 2 |
| Nov 2025 | Isabel | 165K | 8.7% | 3 |
| Nov 2025 | Wolters Kluwer | 135K | 7.1% | 4 |
| Nov 2025 | BMJ Best Practice | 14.8K | 0.78% | 5 |
| Dec 2025 | UpToDate | 1M | 61.9% | 1 |
| Dec 2025 | Elsevier | 301K | 18.6% | 2 |
| Dec 2025 | Isabel | 165K | 10.2% | 3 |
| Dec 2025 | Wolters Kluwer | 135K | 8.4% | 4 |
| Dec 2025 | BMJ Best Practice | 14.8K | 0.92% | 5 |
| Jan 2026 | UpToDate | 1.2M | 65.4% | 1 |
| Jan 2026 | Elsevier | 301K | 16.1% | 2 |
| Jan 2026 | Isabel | 165K | 8.8% | 3 |
| Jan 2026 | Wolters Kluwer | 165K | 8.8% | 4 |
| Jan 2026 | BMJ Best Practice | 14.8K | 0.79% | 5 |
| Feb 2026 | UpToDate | 1M | 60.4% | 1 |
| Feb 2026 | Elsevier | 301K | 18.2% | 2 |
| Feb 2026 | Wolters Kluwer | 201K | 12.1% | 3 |
| Feb 2026 | Isabel | 135K | 8.2% | 4 |
| Feb 2026 | BMJ Best Practice | 18.1K | 1.1% | 5 |
| Mar 2026 | UpToDate | 1.2M | 63.5% | 1 |
| Mar 2026 | Elsevier | 368K | 19.2% | 2 |
| Mar 2026 | Wolters Kluwer | 165K | 8.6% | 3 |
| Mar 2026 | Isabel | 135K | 7% | 4 |
| Mar 2026 | BMJ Best Practice | 33.1K | 1.7% | 5 |
| Apr 2026 | UpToDate | 1.2M | 64.9% | 1 |
| Apr 2026 | Elsevier | 368K | 19.6% | 2 |
| Apr 2026 | Isabel | 135K | 7.2% | 3 |
| Apr 2026 | Wolters Kluwer | 135K | 7.2% | 4 |
| Apr 2026 | BMJ Best Practice | 22.2K | 1.2% | 5 |
| May 2026 | UpToDate | 1M | 61.8% | 1 |
| May 2026 | Elsevier | 301K | 18.6% | 2 |
| May 2026 | Isabel | 165K | 10.2% | 3 |
| May 2026 | Wolters Kluwer | 135K | 8.3% | 4 |
| May 2026 | BMJ Best Practice | 18.1K | 1.1% | 5 |
| Jun 2026 | UpToDate | 1M | 65.4% | 1 |
| Jun 2026 | Elsevier | 246K | 16.1% | 2 |
| Jun 2026 | Isabel | 135K | 8.8% | 3 |
| Jun 2026 | Wolters Kluwer | 135K | 8.8% | 4 |
| Jun 2026 | BMJ Best Practice | 12.1K | 0.79% | 5 |
| Jul 2026 | UpToDate | 1M | 64.2% | 1 |
| Jul 2026 | Elsevier | 246K | 15.8% | 2 |
| Jul 2026 | Isabel | 165K | 10.6% | 3 |
| Jul 2026 | Wolters Kluwer | 135K | 8.7% | 4 |
| Jul 2026 | BMJ Best Practice | 12.1K | 0.78% | 5 |
| Aug 2026 | UpToDate | 1M | 62% | 1 |
| Aug 2026 | Elsevier | 301K | 18.7% | 2 |
| Aug 2026 | Isabel | 165K | 10.2% | 3 |
| Aug 2026 | Wolters Kluwer | 135K | 8.4% | 4 |
| Aug 2026 | BMJ Best Practice | 12.1K | 0.75% | 5 |
| Sep 2026 | BMJ Best Practice | — | — | — |
| Sep 2026 | Elsevier | — | — | — |
| Sep 2026 | Isabel | — | — | — |
| Sep 2026 | UpToDate | — | — | — |
| Sep 2026 | Wolters Kluwer | — | — | — |

## What is being compared

- **BMJ Best Practice**: Measured on the search term “bmj best practice”.
- **Elsevier**: Measured on the search term “elsevier”.
- **Isabel**: Measured on the search term “isabel”.
- **UpToDate**: Measured on the search term “uptodate”.
- **Wolters Kluwer**: Measured on the search term “wolters kluwer”.

- [BMJ Best Practice](/demand/global-en/brands/bmj-best-practice)
- [Elsevier](/demand/global-en/brands/elsevier)
- [Isabel](/demand/global-en/brands/isabel)
- [UpToDate](/demand/global-en/brands/uptodate)
- [Wolters Kluwer](/demand/global-en/brands/wolters-kluwer)

## Methodology

- [How is branded search demand measured?](/demand/methodology): Where the figures come from, what they compare, and how they may be reused.

## Frequently asked questions

### Which brand is most popular in search among clinical decision support platforms worldwide?

In August 2026, UpToDate was the most searched among clinical decision support platforms worldwide, with an estimated 1M branded searches and 62% estimated Share of Search within this set. These are worldwide searches for English-language branded terms.

## Cite this page

Brandwave. "Clinical decision support platforms: Which brands are most popular in search?". https://gobrandwave.com/demand/global-en/categories/clinical-decision-support-platforms

This page is also available as HTML at https://gobrandwave.com/demand/global-en/categories/clinical-decision-support-platforms. Brandwave publishes an index of its Markdown pages at https://gobrandwave.com/llms.txt.