OpenEvidence
ASO Keyword Dashboard
Tracking 78 keywords for OpenEvidence in Google Play
OpenEvidence tracks 78 keywords (7 keywords rank; 71 need traction). Key metrics: 0% top-10 coverage, opportunity 70.8, difficulty 44.1, best rank 31.
OpenEvidence provides accurate answers at the point of care (NPI REQUIRED)
Tracked keywords
78
7 ranked • 71 not ranking yet
Top 10 coverage
0%
Best rank 31 • Latest leader —
Avg opportunity
70.8
Top keyword: patient
Avg difficulty
44.1
Lower scores indicate easier wins
Opportunity leaders
- 64.8
patient
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 39.4 • Rank —
Competitors: 200
- 65.1
calculation
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 41.2 • Rank —
Competitors: 375
- 64.6
decision
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 40.8 • Rank —
Competitors: 560
- 65.3
verified
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 42.2 • Rank —
Competitors: 556
- 65.1
united
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 42.5 • Rank —
Competitors: 642
Unranked opportunities
patient
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 39.4 • Competitors: 200
calculation
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 41.2 • Competitors: 375
decision
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 40.8 • Competitors: 560
verified
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 42.2 • Competitors: 556
united
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 42.5 • Competitors: 642
High competition keywords
find
Total apps: 302,834 • Major competitors: 17,561
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 58.5
like
Total apps: 286,264 • Major competitors: 22,371
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 60.7
information
Total apps: 264,413 • Major competitors: 8,150
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 54.8
best
Total apps: 250,470 • Major competitors: 18,391
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 57.5
available
Total apps: 194,534 • Major competitors: 10,380
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 58.3
All tracked keywords
Includes opportunity, difficulty, rankings and competitor benchmarks
| Major Competitors | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| specific | 69 | 100 | 51 | 77 65,438 competing apps Median installs: 1,374 Avg rating: 2.4 | 36 | 31 | 2,533 major competitor apps |
| accurate | 70 | 100 | 48 | 75 50,897 competing apps Median installs: 1,435 Avg rating: 2.4 | 60 | 60 | 2,485 major competitor apps |
| useful | 70 | 100 | 48 | 75 52,893 competing apps Median installs: 3,988 Avg rating: 2.5 | 61 | 61 | 2,630 major competitor apps |
| professionals | 72 | 100 | 43 | 71 27,761 competing apps Median installs: 444 Avg rating: 1.9 | 78 | 78 | 411 major competitor apps |
| leading | 71 | 100 | 47 | 72 32,399 competing apps Median installs: 1,346 Avg rating: 2.3 | 85 | 85 | 1,410 major competitor apps |
| able | 69 | 100 | 50 | 78 76,806 competing apps Median installs: 2,128 Avg rating: 2.4 | 98 | 88 | 3,591 major competitor apps |
| ask | 71 | 100 | 57 | 72 30,735 competing apps Median installs: 2,272 Avg rating: 2.3 | 170 | 170 | 1,223 major competitor apps |
| best | 66 | 100 | 57 | 86 250,470 competing apps Median installs: 4,208 Avg rating: 2.6 | — | — | 18,391 major competitor apps |
| level | 68 | 100 | 54 | 80 104,957 competing apps Median installs: 2,535 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 6,880 major competitor apps |
| health | 69 | 100 | 49 | 77 68,509 competing apps Median installs: 768 Avg rating: 2.1 | — | — | 1,946 major competitor apps |
| care | 70 | 100 | 49 | 76 55,390 competing apps Median installs: 1,417 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 2,714 major competitor apps |
| support | 67 | 100 | 55 | 83 164,701 competing apps Median installs: 1,612 Avg rating: 2.6 | — | — | 7,885 major competitor apps |
| date | 68 | 100 | 53 | 79 91,840 competing apps Median installs: 798 Avg rating: 2.2 | — | — | 2,895 major competitor apps |
| medical | 71 | 100 | 44 | 72 33,257 competing apps Median installs: 1,248 Avg rating: 2.1 | — | — | 882 major competitor apps |
| information | 65 | 100 | 55 | 86 264,413 competing apps Median installs: 1,196 Avg rating: 2.2 | — | — | 8,150 major competitor apps |
| team | 69 | 100 | 52 | 79 84,520 competing apps Median installs: 1,464 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 4,201 major competitor apps |
| content | 67 | 100 | 56 | 81 128,388 competing apps Median installs: 2,336 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 6,045 major competitor apps |
| find | 65 | 100 | 58 | 87 302,834 competing apps Median installs: 2,786 Avg rating: 2.6 | — | — | 17,561 major competitor apps |
| available | 66 | 100 | 58 | 84 194,534 competing apps Median installs: 2,770 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 10,380 major competitor apps |
| search | 67 | 100 | 58 | 82 129,628 competing apps Median installs: 3,393 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 6,838 major competitor apps |
| healthcare | 73 | 100 | 41 | 67 15,924 competing apps Median installs: 702 Avg rating: 2.1 | — | — | 325 major competitor apps |
| community | 69 | 100 | 51 | 78 83,587 competing apps Median installs: 548 Avg rating: 2.3 | — | — | 2,677 major competitor apps |
| power | 69 | 100 | 53 | 77 66,327 competing apps Median installs: 2,288 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 4,103 major competitor apps |
| partner | 72 | 100 | 46 | 71 27,052 competing apps Median installs: 1,170 Avg rating: 2.3 | — | — | 1,120 major competitor apps |
| patient | 74 | 100 | 39 | 65 11,560 competing apps Median installs: 599 Avg rating: 2.0 | — | — | 200 major competitor apps |
App Description
OpenEvidence provides accurate answers at the point of care (NPI REQUIRED)
OpenEvidence is trusted by hundreds of thousands of verified healthcare professionals to support high-stakes clinical decisions at the point of care with answers that are sourced, cited, and grounded in peer-reviewed medical literature.
OpenEvidence is the fastest-growing and most widely-used clinical decision support platform in the world–used daily, on average, by over 40% of physicians in the United States, spanning more than 10,000 hospitals and medical centers nationwide.
Now sourcing from over 300+ medical journals, as well as the FDA and CDC. OpenEvidence is an official AI partner of The New England Journal of Medicine and the Journal of American Medical Association (and their 11 specialty journals), and has content agreements, partnerships and collaborations with:
• NCCN
• ACC
• ADA
• ACEP
• AAFP
• AAOS
• AAOHNS and more.
OpenEvidence is only available for health care professionals. Users must verify their health care professional status before using OpenEvidence.
TESTIMONIALS
“I've been using OpenEvidence for the last week - it has been amazing! Able to narrow down on results quickly and find information that I wasn't able to do with Google/PubMed searches on my own.” - Dr. John Lee, MD. Physician & Faculty Member, Harvard Medical School
“OpenEvidence can be the foundational technology to power all clinical decision tools.” - Dr. Antonio Jorge Forte, MD. Director of MayoExpert, Mayo Clinic
“OpenEvidence is more up-to-date than UpToDate. And more useful regardless, since it’s interactive, and you can ask it questions, and get very specific answers about specific medical fact patterns in a patient case. It’s like having a curbside consult with a team of expert physicians, but that you can carry around with you in your pocket.” - Dr. Ram Dandillaya, MD. Clinical Chief, Department of Cardiology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
“I am in community practice and medical director of a community cancer center. OpenEvidence has been an incredible lifeline for daily practitioners.” - C.J., Oncologist
“OpenEvidence is absolutely fantastic. I use it a gazillion times a day.” - J.A., Neurologist
“OpenEvidence’s efforts to make medicine more evidence-based are invaluable. The shift from judgment to calculation can reduce the level of noise currently found in medicine.” - Daniel Kahneman, Nobel Prize Laureate (In Memoriam)
“It is light years ahead of the next best medical oriented AI I have used.” - R.E.., Oncologist