Elicit vs Scite

Elicit

RAG

Scite

RAG

Tagline

Elicit

AI research assistant that searches, screens, and extracts data from 138M+ academic papers at scale.

Scite

AI research assistant that grades citations as supporting, contrasting, or mentioning across 1.6B citation statements.

Pricing

Elicit

Freemium· Basic: Free · Plus: $11 · Pro: $39 · Scale: $89 · Enterprise: Custom

Scite

Freemium· Basic: $20 · Pro: $50 · Team: $50 · Enterprise: Contact us

Lowest paid tier

Elicit

$11 · Plus

captured 2026-08-05

Scite

$20 · Basic

captured 2026-08-02

Free trial

Elicit

Yes

Scite

Yes

API

Elicit

Yes

Scite

Yes

Platforms

Elicit

api

Scite

api

Company

Elicit

—

Scite

Research Solutions

Model used

Elicit

Claude Opus 4.5

Scite

Multi-model

Best for

Elicit

Pick Elicit if you're running systematic reviews, meta-analyses, or evidence syntheses and need to screen and extract from hundreds of papers without hiring a team of RAs.

Scite

Pick Scite if you do serious literature reviews and want to see, at a glance, whether a cited claim is actually supported or contradicted downstream.

Not for

Elicit

Skip it if your research is non-academic, you mostly write blog-style summaries, or you need a general-purpose chatbot rather than a literature-grounded extraction tool.

Scite

Skip it if you need a general-purpose AI assistant or are not working with peer-reviewed scientific literature.

Editorial score

Elicit

7.1 / 10

Scite

8.2 / 10

Use cases

Elicit

literature-reviewsystematic-reviewpaper-searchdata-extractionresearch-synthesis

Scite

literature-reviewcitation-analysisacademic-researchsystematic-reviewreference-checking

Pros

Elicit

• Indexes 138M+ academic papers with sentence-level citations
• Automates systematic review screening and extraction at scale
• Reported 95-99% accuracy on review tasks, used by 2M+ researchers
• API access for programmatic search and report generation
• Free tier available for evaluation

Scite

• Smart Citations label every reference as supporting, contrasting, or mentioning with context
• AI Assistant answers are grounded in published papers, not open-web prose
• MCP server plus Zotero, ChatGPT, and Claude integrations
• Dashboards and alerts for tracking papers, authors, and topics over time
• Public API for teams building on top of the citation graph

Cons

Elicit

• Narrow to academic/scientific literature workflows
• Pro pricing required to unlock full extraction throughput
• Closed-source; you depend on their pipeline and chosen model
• Citations still need human verification for high-stakes work

Scite

• Useful mostly for scholarly work; not a general writing or coding tool
• Full features gated behind a paid plan after a short trial
• Coverage and full-text depth depend on publisher partnerships
• Classifications are model-generated and occasionally need human sanity-checking

Website

Elicit

elicit.com

Scite

scite.ai

Editorial score: rule-based, 0–10, from AI-assisted profile inputs (see /methodology) — not a user rating; “—” means unscored. “Not listed” means we have no record of it, not that it is absent. GitHub figures and prices carry the date they were checked or captured; prices are shown as published, unconverted.