Methodology & transparency
How PharmaAiAtlas sources the evidence behind its vendors. Our standard is simple: every claim of a real-world outcome must point to a source you can open and check yourself. If we can't cite it, we don't publish it.
The evidence standard
The "Evidence & outcomes" section on each vendor and problem page lists real case studies, partnerships, and measurable outcomes. Each entry is required — at the data layer, not just by convention — to carry a verifiable citation: a source URL, a source type, and a publication date. An uncited entry cannot physically be stored.
- Every item links out. The source link, publisher, and publication date are shown on the card so you can verify the claim at its origin.
- Gaps stay gaps. Where we found no clean, verifiable source for a vendor, we list nothing for that vendor rather than fill the space.
- No fabricated clinical metrics. Any sentence asserting a clinical-accuracy percentage is automatically stripped before it can be shown.
Source types we recognize
- Peer-reviewed — Published research in scientific or medical journals (e.g. PubMed Central, Nature Medicine).
- Regulatory filing — Documents from regulators or securities filings (e.g. FDA, EMA, SEC).
- Press release — Official company or partner announcements, dated and publicly archived.
- News — Reporting from established industry or business publications.
- Vendor case study — A vendor's own documented customer story — labeled as such, never treated as independent proof.
What this section is — and isn't
Evidence & outcomes is a curated record of publicly documented milestones, not a ranking and not an endorsement. A longer evidence list reflects how much a company has publicly disclosed and how well-covered it is in the public record — not that it is a better fit for your needs. To rank vendors against your specific context, use the Atlas Fit™ engine.