Rating certificate · AW/26-09/46526 Sept 2026
71of 100
The Register / Research agents / Elicit
Register entry · Research agents · updated 26 Sept 2026
Elicit
Elicit is a closed-source web application, spun out of the Ought research lab, that searches a large academic paper corpus, extracts structured data from papers into tables, supports screening for systematic reviews (with PRISMA 2020 support since May 2026), and generates research reports. In August 2026 it launched a Research Agent, and it offers an API and MCP server. Plans range from a free Basic tier to Pro, Scale and Enterprise.
What reviewers and users praise
- Data-extraction accuracy found noninferior to human-only extraction, faster and cheaper, in a 2026 study-within-a-review (Lee et al., medRxiv)
- Frequently rated the strongest tool for screening and extraction in 2026 comparisons of AI literature tools
What they criticise
- Search is not sensitive enough to replace traditional systematic-review searching (Lau et al., 2025)
- Extraction needs human validation and fine-tuned prompts; best as a complement to human extractors (Lagisz et al., 2026)
- Training/retention guarantees are published for Enterprise only; policies for free and individual plans are undocumented
Experts vs the crowdneeds both scores
Experts72
Crowd—
| Price | Free, paid from $49 |
|---|---|
| Use it via | Web app, API, MCP server |
| Runs on | web |
| Licence | proprietary |
| Updated | Evidence collected 26 Sept 2026 |
How the rating was worked out
Weights for Research agents: adoption 35%, experts 40%, crowd 25%. Pillars without enough evidence are left out and the others re-weighted. The method.
| Adoption & momentumweight 35% | 69 | Reported users 5M → 73 · 4 releases in 90 days → 60reach × 0.7 + momentum × 0.3 |
|---|---|---|
| Expertsindependent reviews · weight 40% | 72 | 6 independent reviews (4 positive · 2 mixed · 0 negative), averaged toward 50 for small samples. |
| Crowdcommunity sample · weight 25% | — | Only 2 community items sampled (6 needed) |
| Rating | 71 | Provisional: low confidence (2 of 3 pillars, 2 community posts). |
Evidence checks. 2 items could not be checked at the source (the page could not be fetched, or the quote is from a comment under the linked post); kept and marked “unverified”. How evidence is checked.
Trust & safety
Seven dimensions graded A–D from documented facts. Overall: B.
n/e
Permission model
Hosted research assistant that reads papers and user uploads; it does not execute actions on user systems. Rubric does not map; not graded.
n/e
Data access scope
Works on the public paper corpus plus documents the user uploads; no scoping documentation reviewed.
C
Data storage
Cloud service; privacy policy (last updated 12 Sep 2023) states 'Our servers are located in the United States.' Retention is 'as long as it is necessary'; the DPA retains customer personal data for the term of the agreement. No self-hosting; region choice and user-facing deletion controls not documented in what was reviewed. source
D
Data retention & training
Enterprise only: 'We explicitly do not train on Enterprise user data' and 'Our third party model providers also have zero data retention policies and guarantee no training.' For Basic/Pro/Scale users neither the privacy policy nor the terms (both last updated Sep 2023) state a training policy; the terms allow retaining de-identified usage data to improve the service. Graded D as 'undocumented' for the default tiers; Enterprise terms would merit A. source
A
Incident history (24 months)
No CVEs or disclosed security incidents found (NVD keyword search; vendor security blog). source
A
Compliance
SOC 2 Type II achieved (announced 30 Oct 2025); the vendor states the report had no noted exceptions and is available via trust.elicit.com. source
B
Transparency
Closed source; dated public changelog on the help centre, product blog, and published accuracy evaluations. source
The experts
6 named independent reviews found; dated reviews from the last 12 months are scored.
- positive
AI-assisted data extraction using Elicit® showed noninferior accuracy, faster completion times, similar error types and severity, and lower costs compared to human-only extraction.
Lee, O'Brien, Presseau, Wolfenden, Thomas, Hodder et al. (medRxiv preprint) · 27 Feb 2026 · medrxiv.org - mixed
Elicit can complement, but not replace, human data extractors. Elicit may be best used for sanity checks and to evaluate the clarity of data extraction protocols.
Lagisz, Mizuno, Morrison, Pollo, Ricolfi, Yang, Nakagawa (Research Synthesis Methods) · 29 May 2026 · cambridge.org - mixed
Whilst Elicit searches are currently not sensitive enough to replace traditional searching, Elicit is continually improving, and further evaluations should be undertaken as new developments take place.
O. Lau et al. (Cochrane Evidence Synthesis and Methods) · 27 Sept 2025 · pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov - positive
Quick verdict: Elicit is the best AI research assistant for systematically reading academic papers and extracting structured data from them at ...
Digital by Default · 27 Mar 2026 · digitalbydefault.ai - positive
Elicit is the best overall AI literature review tool here for serious screening and extraction.
Filip Konecny · 12 Aug 2026 · filipkonecny.com - positive
Elicit takes first place because it carries a serious review past search and into screening, extraction, comparison, and export.
Omid Saffari · 31 Jul 2026 · omidsaffari.com
The crowd
2 coded posts from reddit.
1 positive1 mixed0 negative
- positive
I use Elicit to do some mini-lit reviews. It does a decent job of finding papers relevant to a natural language query, and it can give you a ...
r/PhdProductivity 'Tools for literature review in 2026' (comment) · 12 Feb 2026 · search snippet · unverified · reddit.com - mixed
Consensus or Elicit can be helpful for turning a research question into a first-pass evidence map, but I still open the original papers and ...
r/PhdProductivity 'Tools for literature review in 2026' (comment) · 12 Feb 2026 · search snippet · unverified · reddit.com
Pricing
As published, checked 26 Sept 2026.
| Plan | Price | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Basic | Free | Limited usage for Research Agent and Research Reports. |
| Pro | $49 / monthly | Pricing page shows '$49/month' and 'billed as $588 annually'; screens up to 5,000 papers in the systematic review workflow; 20 table columns at a time; reports from up to 135 sources. |
| Scale | $169 / monthly | Pricing page shows '$169/month' and 'billed as $2,028 annually'; 5x usage of Pro; 30 columns; reports from up to 200 sources. |
| Enterprise | Custom | Custom pricing; screen 40,000 papers and extract 40 columns; unlimited API access. |
Recent changes
- 17 Sept 2026
Shared Elicit Library as a team research hub. source
- 1 Sept 2026
Multiplayer research: several researchers can work together in the same Elicit workspace. source
- 5 Aug 2026
Elicit Research Agent launched. source
- 15 Jul 2026
Upgraded Elicit API and MCP server. source
- 30 Jun 2026
Research Agent upgrade; moved from workflow-based limits to monthly usage limits. source
Sources
Every figure above traces to one of these, observed up to 26 Sept 2026.