Navigation
Explore
Explore
Elicit is an AI research assistant for systematic literature reviews, searching 138M+ papers and extracting structured data with sentence-level citations.
Research
9.5Structured data extraction with >90% accuracy (99.4% documented in a German government education policy systematic review) and sentence-level citations for every extracted value enables systematic literature reviews at a fraction of the manual cost; search spanning 138M+ papers, PubMed, and 545,000+ ClinicalTrials.gov studies covers the primary academic evidence base for most disciplines.
Data Analysis
9.0Custom column definition for data extraction tables allows researchers to extract specific quantitative or qualitative data points (sample sizes, effect sizes, adverse event rates) across hundreds of papers into 20,000-cell exportable tables in CSV, BIB, or RIS format without manual reading of each paper.
Education
8.5Basic free plan with unlimited paper search and 2 reports/month enables students to conduct evidence-grounded literature reviews without cost; Plus at $12/month provides 4 reports/month suitable for dissertation and thesis workflows; Chat with Papers supports directed learning through natural language questions about specific papers.
Content Creation
7.0Automated 10+ page Research Reports with sentence-level citations provide researchers and science writers with structured evidence summaries suitable for grant proposals, policy briefs, and technical writing; output requires human editing and Elicit does not generate original creative or marketing content.
Personal Productivity
8.0Research Alerts notify researchers when new papers matching their topics are published, reducing manual literature monitoring; Notebook organises and annotates paper collections for ongoing research projects; Basic free plan covers light literature monitoring at no cost.
Elicit is an AI research platform built specifically for systematic reviews, literature search, and structured data extraction from academic papers across 138 million indexed papers plus 545,000+ ClinicalTrials.gov studies. Its core differentiator is automated structured data extraction — researchers define custom columns (sample size, methodology, adverse effects) and Elicit populates tables with >90% accuracy and supporting quotes for every extracted value, verified at 99.4% accuracy in a published government policy systematic review. Powered by Claude Opus 4.5, Elicit's Research Reports generate 10+ page literature reviews with sentence-level citations. The free Basic plan includes 2 reports/month; guided Systematic Review workflow requires Pro at $49/month. Semantic search can miss up to 15% of relevant papers — traditional keyword search via PubMed is recommended as a supplement for formal systematic reviews.
Pricing
| Plan | Model | Usage Limits | Price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Basic | Elicit semantic search engine (138M+ papers); basic AI summaries; 2 automated reports/month; 2 extraction columns; no full systematic review workflow | 2 automated research reports/month; unlimited paper search; 2 columns per data extraction table; limited Chat with Papers; no Research Alerts; no guided Systematic Review | Free |
| Plus | All Basic features; 4 reports/month (48/year on annual); Chat with Papers; expanded extraction; Claude Opus 4.5 for report generation | 4 reports/month or 48/year on annual (full year's reports granted upfront); unlimited search; Chat with Papers; basic systematic review access; no custom columns; no Research Alerts | $12/month or $120/year |
| Pro | All Plus features; Claude Opus 4.5; guided 4-step Systematic Review workflow (search, screen, extract, report); 20 custom columns; 10 concurrent Research Alerts; Research Agent; full export suite | 12 reports/month or 144/year (full year's reports upfront on annual); 20 custom columns; 10 concurrent Research Alerts; unlimited table exports (CSV/BIB/RIS); Chat with Papers (8 full-text papers at once); guided Systematic Review workflow; Research Agent | $49/month or $499/year |
| Team | All Pro features; real-time collaborative editing for Notebooks and Systematic Reviews; shared workflows; admin panel; pooled report quota | 20 reports/month per user or 240/year pooled; all Pro features; real-time collaborative editing; admin panel; seat management; unified billing | $79/seat/month or $780/seat/year; 2-seat minimum |
| Enterprise | All Team features; SSO/SAML; single-tenancy; custom data source integration; dedicated support | All Team features; SSO and SAML; 2FA; user analytics; custom data sources; custom templates; single-tenancy; dedicated customer success | custom |
Pro at $49/month provides the guided Systematic Review workflow spanning search, AI screening (identifying 95% of relevant papers), structured data extraction (>90% accuracy), and automated report generation — covering the full systematic review pipeline that takes manual teams 3–12 months in weeks, as used by Oxford PharmaGenesis and CSIRO.
Free Basic plan covers literature search and 2 reports/month for coursework; Plus at $12/month ($120/year) provides 4 systematic reviews/month for dissertation chapters; Elicit identifies relevant papers without exact keyword matching, covering niche topics where standard keyword searches fail to retrieve semantically related papers.
Research Alerts on Pro keep educators current with new papers without manual database monitoring; Team plan at $79/seat enables departmental research teams to collaborate on systematic reviews in real time; institutional pricing via Enterprise covers course-embedded research workflows at scale.
Custom extraction columns pulling specific quantitative data points from hundreds of papers into 20,000-cell exportable tables provide structured datasets for meta-analysis and evidence synthesis without manual reading; Claude Opus 4.5 extraction of tabular data from papers (PFS, adverse effects, trial arm outcomes) supports pharmaceutical and clinical research data pipelines.
Consensus
Complementary research tool — Consensus quickly synthesises binary evidence questions using its Consensus Meter while Elicit provides structured data extraction and systematic review for the same papers.
Scite
Complementary citation analysis tool — Scite evaluates whether papers' claims are supported or contradicted by subsequent literature while Elicit extracts structured data from those papers.
Consider These Instead
Choose Consensus when the primary need is quick, binary evidence questions ("Does X help with Y?") using the Consensus Meter to synthesise the weight of evidence across 200M+ papers in a single visual output — Consensus is better for rapid evidence checking without building structured extraction tables. Choose Scite when citation quality analysis — distinguishing supporting from contrasting citations with context — is the primary requirement rather than structured data extraction; Scite's Smart Citations classify 1.6B+ citation statements, a capability Elicit does not provide. Choose Covidence when a formal systematic review tool built for PRISMA-compliant publication workflows with two-reviewer screening, conflict resolution, and integration with Cochrane processes is required — Covidence is the standard tool for regulatory-grade systematic review documentation that Elicit's guided workflow approximates.