OpenEvidence represents a significant advancement in clinical decision support technology, positioning itself as a comprehensive medical information platform exclusively for credentialed healthcare professionals. The application requires National Provider Identifier (NPI) verification, ensuring access remains restricted to qualified medical practitioners seeking evidence-based clinical guidance. The platform's core functionality centers on delivering accurate, sourced medical information drawn from peer-reviewed literature, now enhanced through partnership with the New England Journal of Medicine. This integration provides access to NEJM published content, multimedia resources, and invited review articles from leading medical authorities. Each response includes complete citations and source documentation, allowing clinicians to verify information directly against original research. User experience demonstrates thoughtful design for clinical workflows, featuring a clean interface that presents complex medical information in digestible formats. The Android application maintains full functionality compared to the web version, with reviews noting absence of response truncation issues present in some competing platforms. Real-world usage patterns show integration into point-of-care scenarios, often alongside established resources like DynaMed for cross-referencing and validation. User feedback indicates generally positive reception, though with important qualifications. Physician users like Philip S (January 13, 2025) describe the platform as 'everything I have been waiting for since AI's first took the field,' praising complete answers supported by scientific references. However, Ahmed Gemei's review (January 5, 2025) notes approximately 15% error rates in subspecialty areas or when processing leading questions, emphasizing the continued necessity of reference verification. The application demonstrates particular strength in general medical contexts while showing limitations in highly specialized domains. Its value proposition centers on rapid information retrieval with robust sourcing, though clinicians must maintain critical evaluation practices. Ideal use cases involve general clinical decision support rather than replacement for specialist consultation or comprehensive literature review, serving as an efficient supplementary tool for evidence-based practice.