Registry transparency
See the quality controls, including the gaps
A public snapshot of the Registry's own evidence-management data. These figures are generated from the same records shown on compound profiles. They are transparency metrics, not an independent audit or a claim of scientific endorsement.
Current Registry coverage
102
Compound profiles
226
Linked curated sources
6
References pending curation
0
Profiles with external review recorded
Source curation status
96
Sources fully curated
The core approval and evidence claims on this profile are backed by curated primary sources: regulator documents, trial registries or peer-reviewed work.
2
Sources partially curated
Some core claims are backed by curated primary sources; others still await verified references. Gaps are marked honestly rather than filled with weak links.
4
Source curation pending
Verified primary sources have not yet been curated for this profile. Treat its statements as the registry's editorial position pending sourcing, not as externally verified fact.
Editorial review freshness
102
Within the 90-day attention window
The profile has an editorial review date within 90 days. This does not guarantee that no newer evidence exists.
0
Review attention due
These profiles crossed the Registry's operational 90-day attention threshold. The flag is not evidence that a profile is wrong.
Reference mix
94
Regulatory / label
Regulator press releases, approval documents and official product labels.
11
Trial registry
ClinicalTrials.gov or equivalent official trial registry record.
72
Peer-reviewed
Published peer-reviewed paper or review.
2
Preprint — not peer reviewed
A manuscript posted publicly before peer review. The data are real and citable, but nobody independent has yet checked the methods, analysis or conclusions, so treat it as provisional and liable to change.
46
Sponsor / official
Sponsor or developer communication; flagged as non-independent.
3
Patent / legal / policy record
Patents, trademark registrations or official policy lists such as anti-doping rules. They document claims, ownership or classification — not peer-reviewed evidence of efficacy or safety.
6
To be curated
A verified source has not yet been curated for this statement.
What these numbers do not prove
More citations do not automatically mean stronger evidence. A fully curated profile can still conclude that evidence is weak, null, conflicting or preclinical. Source completeness and evidence strength are separate questions.
External review is counted only when a completed, named, profile-specific review is recorded. General correspondence, project advice and expressions of interest are excluded.