- Standard rate limits on chats and searches.
- Not disclosed
- Not disclosed
- —
- 2023

Undermind
by Undermind · founded 2023
Literature-search agent that asks follow-up questions, reads hundreds of papers and follows citation trails.
On this page
- Regulatory & Compliance0/11
No FDA clearance listed
- Clinical Integration0/7.8
No EHR integrations listed
- Evidence Strength20.7/27
2 peer-reviewed papers
- Vendor & Market6/18
Seed-stage or unfunded
- Sentiment & Transparency6.5/15.5
Prices listed publicly
▸ Show all 11 dimensions▾ Hide dimension detail
- FDA clearance0/6
No FDA clearance listed
- HIPAA / SOC2 / BAA0/5
No public HIPAA/SOC2/BAA attestation
- EHR integrations (count)0/4
No EHR integrations listed
- Top-3 EHR coverage (Epic / Oracle / Athena)0/2
None of the top-3 EHRs covered
- Bidirectional write-back0/1
No bidirectional write-back documented
- Peer-reviewed papers15/21
2 peer-reviewed papers
- RCT / meta-analysis / systematic review6/6
1 RCT/Meta-Analysis/Systematic Review
- Funding & adoption signal3/12
Seed-stage or unfunded
- Years in market3/6
Founded 2023 (3 years)
- Clinician sentiment (Reddit)0/9
No clinician sentiment data available
- Pricing transparency7/7
Prices listed publicly
Literature-search agent that asks follow-up questions, reads hundreds of papers and follows citation trails.
Standard rate limits on chats and searches.
Bottom line
Undermind is a literature-search agent. You describe a research goal, it asks follow-up questions, then reads and ranks papers by following citation trails and returns a report. It is not a clinical tool, and nothing on its site claims clinical decision support. It suits a researcher or a clinician writing a narrative or scoping review who cares more about recall than speed. Anyone who needs a reproducible, reportable search strategy for a systematic review should keep using PubMed and the standard databases. A library journal review reportedly found Undermind's searches could not be reported or reproduced.
What is Undermind and who sells it?
Undermind calls itself "your AI co-researcher". It says it reads and evaluates hundreds of papers and follows citation trails, then delivers iterative reports and alerts (Undermind website, October 2026). The company was founded in 2023, is based in San Francisco and was part of the Y Combinator Summer 2024 batch. The founders are Josh Ramette (CEO) and Tom Hartke (CTO), both described in a third-party profile as MIT quantum physics PhDs. Funding is about $500K from Y Combinator, FundersClub and Pioneer Fund in September 2024 (Crunchbase, Tracxn). Latka estimates 2025 annual recurring revenue at about $440K.
What does it do?
The core feature is deep search with citation tracing. Around it sit a "Verify responses" option that links claims to the source paper, relevance gauging, saved alerts, custom tables and workspaces. Undermind also offers an MCP connection so that Claude or ChatGPT can call it (Undermind website and MCP page, October 2026). Enterprise adds site-wide login and an admin dashboard.
The vendor claims its search recalls 85% of the 20 most relevant papers within 10 minutes, against 38% to 50% for frontier agents using web search. That benchmark covers 23 complex queries with a gold standard built by an LLM judge, and Undermind ran it itself. A whitepaper claims version 1 gave "10x better results than Google Scholar", also a vendor statement. On the customer side, Undermind says more than 1,000 GSK scientists use it (Undermind case study).
What does independent evidence say?
Little has been published, and none of it is a controlled comparison. A product review in the Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association reportedly called the search strategies "not reportable, transparent, or reproducible" and noted that the tool lacks MeSH integration. In an informal test, Aaron Tay found 8 of 11 gold-standard papers in the top 10 results (Substack). Secondary reviews list slower results than keyword search, coverage that depends on database access and a smaller user community (buildfastwithai.com).
A BMC Nephrology meta-analysis of finerenone in diabetic kidney disease (PMID 41272492) lists Undermind as one of its search sources. It used the tool as a search source and did not evaluate it.
How much does Undermind cost?
Pro costs $16 per month billed annually and Team $15 per person per month billed annually. A free tier has standard rate limits, and Enterprise is priced on request (Undermind pricing page, October 2026). The pricing page has a monthly toggle but lists no monthly Pro price.
How does it compare?
Elicit, Consensus, Scite, SciSpace, Semantic Scholar, Connected Papers, ResearchRabbit and Litmaps cover similar ground. A Casrai guide describes Undermind as an adaptive deep search aimed at recall, a different job from tools that return a quick synthesis of a focused question.
Can patient information go into Undermind?
No. HIPAA, a BAA, SOC 2 and HITRUST are not mentioned on its pages, and no trust page is listed. Undermind is not a medical device.
The verdict
Use Undermind for a scoping search on a topic where a missed paper would hurt, and test it first on a field you know well, where you can see what it misses. Its recall numbers come from the vendor's own benchmark. A team running a registered systematic review should leave it out of the methods section.
Editorial review last generated October 15, 2026. Synthesized from clinician sentiment, peer-reviewed coverage, and our editorial silo picks. Refined by hand where vendor facts change.
What it costs
All tiers are custom-quoted. The vendor does not publish per-provider list pricing.
| Tier | Monthly | Annual | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Free | — | — | Standard rate limits on chats and searches. |
| Pro | — | USD 192 | The page says annual billing saves 20%. The monthly-billed price is not shown. |
| Team | — | USD 180 | Per person. |
| Enterprise | — | — | Contact us. Adds sitewide login and an admin dashboard. |
Source: vendor pricing page. Last checked October 15, 2026.
Who builds it
Undermind (Undermind) was founded in 2023, putting it 3 years into market.
What the literature says
2 peer-reviewed studies indexed on PubMed evaluate Undermind in clinical contexts. The most relevant are shown below, ranked by editorial relevance score combining title match, study design, recency, and journal tier.
- Comparative efficacy and safety of finerenone in diabetic kidney disease: a meta-analysis of Asian and non-Asian populations.
- Raza SA, Rehman AU, Aamir AH, et al.· BMC Nephrol· 2025
- Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is a major global burden, especially in Asia. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of finerenone in diabetic kidney disease, comparing outcomes between Asian and non-Asian populations through a systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, Google Scholar, and the Undermind AI platform from inception through March 2025. Studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and subgroup analyses that evaluated finerenone in DKD patients. Primary outcomes included a reductio…
- Searching smarter, not harder: leveraging AI to enhance literature searches for theory-driven reviews-A methodological case study.
- Hunter R, Booth A, Wood L· BMC Med Res Methodol· 2026
- Integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into literature searching has the potential to enhance research synthesis by improving the identification of conceptually rich or otherwise difficult-to-locate evidence. Theoretical or conceptual literature reviews, including realist reviews, often involve resource-intensive searches because they aim to trace nuanced ideas, mechanisms, or conceptual relationships across multiple sources. This case study illustrates the use of AI-powered tools to support and streamline such literature searching, using a realist review as an example. We applied AI tools-…




