Consensus
An AI search engine that surfaces findings from over 200 million peer-reviewed papers
- Freemium
- New
Consensus is an AI search engine built around one specific frustration: you want an evidence-based answer to a research question, not a page of links. Type your question in plain language and it searches a database of over 200 million peer-reviewed papers, returning real studies rather than open-web summaries. Its signature feature is the Consensus Meter — a visual readout of whether the available studies agree with your question’s premise, contradict it, or haven’t settled it.
The contrast with a general engine like Perplexity matters: Consensus is tuned strictly for empirically answerable scientific questions, and every result is tied to an actual published paper instead of a summary scraped from the web.
What sets it apart
- Consensus Meter: for any “does X cause Y” question, see the supporting / contradicting / inconclusive split in one glance
- Natural-language queries: write your question normally; it handles the translation into a precise literature search
- Study Snapshot: an instant digest of any paper — methods, sample size, key finding — without reading the full text
- Deep Search (Pro): broader analysis spanning many more papers per question, useful for complex questions that need evidence from multiple directions
- Reference-manager integrations: export directly to Zotero, Mendeley, or EndNote
How to use it
- Sign up free at
consensus.app - Phrase your research question clearly — ideally in a “does X affect Y” format
- Read the Consensus Meter to gauge agreement quickly, then open Study Snapshots on individual papers
- For deeper multi-paper analysis, use Deep Search (extended use needs Pro)
- Export the references you need straight into Zotero, Mendeley, or EndNote
Who it’s for
A good fit if you’re a student or researcher who needs a fast, evidence-backed read on a specific scientific question, a clinician or analyst checking what the literature actually says, or a writer verifying a claim before publishing it.
Not a good fit if your work is a full systematic review (Elicit covers that end-to-end), your questions are general or non-scientific (Perplexity), or you need to track how a specific paper has been received since publication (scite).
Limits and warnings
It answers narrow questions well, broad ones poorly. Vague or multi-part questions produce muddy meters — the sharper your question, the better the output.
The meter is a starting point, not a verdict. It aggregates automated analysis of abstracts and papers; any consequential decision deserves the original sources.
English-language corpus. Coverage of research published in other languages is thin, and comprehension of non-English questions drops noticeably.
Alternatives
Elicit is stronger when you need bulk data extraction or a complete literature-review workflow. scite is stronger when you already have a paper in hand and want to know whether later research backed it up or tore it down.
✅ Pros
- Natural-language search returns actual peer-reviewed papers, each with a direct source link
- The Consensus Meter shows at a glance how far the literature agrees on your question — supports, contradicts, or inconclusive
- Unlimited search on the free plan; only monthly Pro Analyses and Study Snapshots are capped
- Integrates with Zotero, Mendeley, and EndNote for painless citation export
❌ Cons
- Deep Search — the multi-paper analysis feature — is locked behind the paid Pro plan ($15/month)
- The corpus is overwhelmingly English-language publishing, so other-language research is weakly covered
- Tuned for empirically answerable scientific questions, not general web search or broad literature reviews like Elicit
- The Consensus Meter is a quick visual summary, not a substitute for reading the underlying papers
💰 Pricing
| Plan | Price | Features |
|---|---|---|
| Free | $0 | Unlimited database searches, up to 10 Pro Analyses and 10 Study Snapshots per month, basic paper browsing and citation export |
| Premium | $8.99 / month (less on annual billing) | Unlimited Pro Analyses and Study Snapshots, advanced result filters, priority search ranking |
| Pro | $15 / month (less on annual billing) | Everything in Premium plus 15 Deep Searches per month — deeper analysis covering many more papers per question |
🔄 Similar Alternatives
⚖️ Comparisons featuring this tool
📘 Tutorials that use this tool
❓ Frequently Asked Questions
How is it different from Elicit?
Consensus is built around answering one research question at a time, using its Consensus Meter to show visually how far studies agree. Elicit is broader — it offers a full systematic-review workflow and structured data extraction across dozens of papers. If you have a specific question and want a fast, evidence-backed answer, Consensus gets there sooner. If your job is a complete literature review, choose Elicit.
Is the free plan enough?
For searching itself — yes, it's unlimited. But Pro Analyses and Study Snapshots (the deeper per-paper summaries) are limited to ten per month on free, and Deep Search — analyzing many papers at once — requires the paid Pro plan entirely.
What exactly is the Consensus Meter?
When you ask a yes/no-style question like 'does X affect Y', it analyzes the relevant studies and shows you what share support the claim, contradict it, or were inconclusive. It's a fast way to gauge where scientific consensus stands on a topic — an automated digest, not a replacement for reading the actual studies.
Does it handle questions outside the sciences?
Poorly. It's designed for empirical, researchable questions; humanities topics, opinion questions, and anything without testable evidence behind it fall flat. For general questions, a general-purpose tool fits better.