--- title: "Isabel vs OpenEvidence: Which is searched more?" description: "Is Isabel or OpenEvidence more popular in search? Compare estimated monthly branded-search demand and Share of Search inside the Clinical decision support platforms set worldwide. 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/compare/isabel-vs-openevidence" publisher: "Brandwave" --- # Isabel vs OpenEvidence: Which is searched more? Is Isabel or OpenEvidence more popular in search? Compare estimated monthly branded-search demand and Share of Search inside the Clinical decision support platforms set worldwide. 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 - **Compared**: Isabel and OpenEvidence - **Competitive set**: Clinical decision support platforms - **Market**: Global - **Month measured**: Sep 2026 - **Isabel Share of Search**: 4.6% - **OpenEvidence Share of Search**: 51.5% ## Is Isabel or OpenEvidence more popular in search? - In September 2026, OpenEvidence had more branded searches than Isabel among clinical decision support platforms worldwide. OpenEvidence had about 1.8 million branded searches, while Isabel had 165,000. OpenEvidence made up 51.5% of all clinical decision support platform searches we track, and Isabel accounted for 4.6%. - OpenEvidence was ahead of Isabel in every measured month of the 12 months ending September 2026. - Across the 12 months ending September 2026, Isabel’s share of searches among clinical decision support platforms worldwide moved from 4.3% to 4.6%, and its estimated monthly branded searches moved from 135K to 165K. - Across the 12 months ending September 2026, OpenEvidence’s share of searches among clinical decision support platforms worldwide moved from 38.8% to 51.5%, and its estimated monthly branded searches moved from 1.2M to 1.8M. ## Top clinical decision support platforms in ChatGPT and Google AI Overviews In three ChatGPT questions and two Google AI Overviews, OpenEvidence was mentioned in two out of five: in two of the three ChatGPT answers, but not in either of the two Google AI Overviews. Isabel did not appear in any of the five answers. Brands get a higher AI rank if they are mentioned earlier in the answers that list options. | Brand | AI rank | ChatGPT answers that named it | Google AI Overviews that named it | All answers that named it | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | UpToDate | 1st | 3 of 3 | 1 of 2 | 4 of 5 | | DynaMed | 2nd | 3 of 3 | 0 of 2 | 3 of 5 | | VisualDx | 3rd | 2 of 3 | 0 of 2 | 2 of 5 | | OpenEvidence | 4th | 2 of 3 | 0 of 2 | 2 of 5 | | BMJ Best Practice | 5th | 1 of 3 | 0 of 2 | 1 of 5 | | Wolters Kluwer | 6th | 2 of 3 | 1 of 2 | 3 of 5 | | Elsevier | Not ranked | 0 of 3 | 1 of 2 | 1 of 5 | | Isabel | Not ranked | 0 of 3 | 0 of 2 | 0 of 5 | ## Every AI answer about clinical decision support platforms - Asked ChatGPT "Which clinical decision support platform should I use?": 1. UpToDate, 2. VisualDx, 3. DynaMed, 4. Wolters Kluwer - Asked ChatGPT "What are the best clinical decision support platforms?": 1. UpToDate, 2. DynaMed, 3. VisualDx, 4. OpenEvidence, 5. Wolters Kluwer - Asked ChatGPT "What's the best clinical decision support platform for evidence based care?": 1. UpToDate, 2. DynaMed, 3. BMJ Best Practice, 4. OpenEvidence - Searched Google, AI Overview "clinical decision support software": 1. UpToDate, 2. Wolters Kluwer - Searched Google, AI Overview "clinical decision support platforms": 1. Elsevier Not named in any answer: Isabel. Brands are listed in the order each answer named them. The answers were collected in the United States on October 20, 2026. ## How did search popularity change for clinical decision support platforms worldwide in September 2026? - In September 2026, OpenEvidence lost share of searches among clinical decision support platforms worldwide, from 52.6% to 51.5%. - Estimated monthly branded searches for Isabel worldwide rose 22.2% over 12 measured months, from 135K to 165K in September 2026. ## Month by month | Month | Isabel estimated searches | Isabel Share of Search | Isabel rank | OpenEvidence estimated searches | OpenEvidence Share of Search | OpenEvidence rank | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Oct 2025 | 135K | 4.3% | 4 | 1.2M | 38.8% | 1 | | Nov 2025 | 165K | 5.6% | 4 | 1M | 34% | 2 | | Dec 2025 | 165K | 6.2% | 4 | 1M | 37.8% | 1 | | Jan 2026 | 165K | 5.3% | 4 | 1.2M | 39.1% | 1 | | Feb 2026 | 135K | 4.6% | 5 | 1.2M | 42% | 1 | | Mar 2026 | 135K | 3.9% | 5 | 1.5M | 43.3% | 1 | | Apr 2026 | 135K | 3.6% | 4 | 1.8M | 48.8% | 1 | | May 2026 | 165K | 5.2% | 4 | 1.5M | 47.6% | 1 | | Jun 2026 | 135K | 4.4% | 4 | 1.5M | 49.1% | 1 | | Jul 2026 | 165K | 4.8% | 4 | 1.8M | 53.5% | 1 | | Aug 2026 | 165K | 4.7% | 4 | 1.8M | 52.6% | 1 | | Sep 2026 | 165K | 4.6% | 4 | 1.8M | 51.5% | 1 | ## How each brand is measured Brandwave collects information about searches that people make online using Isabel’s and OpenEvidence’s names. When viewed over time, estimated search volumes for these branded terms can be used to understand whether interest in the brands is growing, holding steady, or fading. - **Isabel**: Measured on the search term “isabel”. - **OpenEvidence**: Measured on the search term “openevidence”. - [Isabel profile](/demand/global-en/brands/isabel) - [OpenEvidence profile](/demand/global-en/brands/openevidence) - [All clinical decision support platforms worldwide](/demand/global-en/categories/clinical-decision-support-platforms): The set both shares are measured inside, 8 brands. ## Methodology - [How is the Brand Demand Index measured?](/demand/methodology): Where the figures come from, what they compare, and how they may be reused. ## Frequently asked questions ### Is Isabel or OpenEvidence more popular in search? In September 2026, OpenEvidence had more branded searches than Isabel among clinical decision support platforms worldwide. OpenEvidence had about 1.8 million branded searches, while Isabel had 165,000. OpenEvidence made up 51.5% of all clinical decision support platform searches we track, and Isabel accounted for 4.6%. ## Cite this page Brandwave. "Isabel vs OpenEvidence: Which is searched more?". https://gobrandwave.com/demand/global-en/compare/isabel-vs-openevidence This page is also available as HTML at https://gobrandwave.com/demand/global-en/compare/isabel-vs-openevidence. Brandwave publishes an index of its Markdown pages at https://gobrandwave.com/llms.txt.