Scite

Where Scite shines

Scite tracks how scientific papers cite each other and classifies each citation as supporting, disputing, or mentioning. You can see whether a claim has independent support, which papers challenge it, and how a study has been discussed over time. It is a “citation context” lens that complements normal search and helps you avoid relying on papers that are widely disputed or mis-cited.

Scite is a layer on top of scholarly articles that shows how each paper has been cited by later work. Instead of listing raw citation counts, Scite classifies each citation as supporting, disputing, or mentioning, and displays these patterns around a target paper. This turns a static reference into a living conversation where you can see whether a claim gained evidence, met serious counterarguments, or was simply noted in passing. You search for a topic or a paper, Scite returns results with smart citations, and you drill into the context paragraphs that surround each reference in the citing articles. For researchers and analysts this changes the first pass from skimming abstracts to scanning the downstream reception of the core claims. The platform also surfaces influential statements within a paper and builds report cards that summarize citation tone, methods, and reproducibility signals.

Scite shines when you want to map the credibility and evolution of a specific claim across time. During a literature review you can prioritize papers that gather many supporting citations while bookmarking those that attract substantive disputes for closer reading. When briefing a team, the report card for a paper helps you explain at a glance how the field has reacted and where uncertainties remain. For grant writing or product safety reviews, Scite quickly identifies whether an idea stands on contested ground or sits on a stable base. Treat the smart citation labels as guides rather than verdicts. Open the surrounding text in the citing papers to confirm that the classification matches the authors intent and method. Maintain a habit of following the chain to the primary source when a decision depends on a specific statistical result or experimental protocol.

Automated classification of citations is powerful yet not perfect. Nuanced criticism can be labeled as neutral and subtle support can be flagged as a mention, which means human judgment remains essential. Coverage varies by publisher access, subject domain, and recency, so an empty smart citation table does not imply irrelevance. Use Scite as a triage tool that highlights where to read closely. Keep your own notes with full references, and for sensitive research topics avoid entering private data into queries or note fields. With these habits Scite compresses the path from question to an evidence map and reduces the chance of leaning on papers that are heavily disputed without realizing it.

We like Scite because it reveals the conversation around a paper rather than stopping at citation counts. We do not like that automated labels can miss nuance when methods are complex or when a result is conditionally true. It could be better with clearer confidence indicators on each classification and with domain specific guidance that explains common pitfalls in interpretation. What stands out is how quickly a team can separate well supported claims from contested ones and decide where to spend reading time. Security and privacy are standard for a scholarly search product. Keep sensitive project details out of queries and store final notes in your own system of record. Scite is for researchers, clinicians, policy analysts, and product teams who must communicate not only what papers exist but how the field has responded. Its strength is citation context that informs judgment. Its weakness is residual misclassification that you must check with close reading.

At a glance

Coverage & data

Plans & limits

Community signal

Compared to similar tools

Scite is the “how is it cited?” lens. Use Elicit to build extraction tables and Consensus to get plain-language answers linked to studies; Scite then checks the health of those claims across the literature.

Similar tools teams compare

Updating logo

Civics

Empowering citizens, fostering dialogue, and driving change

Pricing: Offers a free tier for basic access and paid plans for advanced features and organizational use. View →

Dimensions

Free/Paid: Freemium

Pricing: Free basic; premium with institutional pricing View →

Updating logo

LectureNotes AI

Transform your lecture notes into actionable summaries.

Pricing: Offers a free tier with limited features and paid plans starting at $10/month for advanced capabilities. View →

Wolfram Alpha

Free/Paid: Freemium (free queries; Pro from ~$4.99/month)

Pricing: Free (Or pro from ~$9.99/month) View →

Updating logo

SciSpace

Streamline your research with AI

Pricing: Offers a free plan with limited features, and paid plans starting at $10/month for advanced functionalities and higher usage limits. View →

Updating logo

Gyana

Unlock insights, organize information, and boost productivity.

Pricing: Offers a free tier for individuals and paid plans for teams with advanced features and collaboration tools. View →

Trying to decide? Compare these

Recent updates

Last updated: 1 month ago