Comparator analyses that hold up, client after client.
Locked recipes and two-person sign-off make the comparator analysis defensible client after client — with an inspectable statistical engine underneath every deliverable.
Template protocols · two-person sign-off · inspectable engineFrom bespoke every time to portable and defensible.
Same workflow, two states. Flip the switch to see what changes.
Live · re-runs for the client
- Each engagement
- A locked recipe, reused
- portable
- Comparator analysis
- Kept current for the client
- living
- Audit answer
- Captured at screen-time, queryable
- instant
One engine, every client deliverable.
The same build-once, keep-live, inspect-everything mechanism — wrapped in the roles, sign-off, and audit trail a client deliverable needs.
Build the comparison once
- A systematic review and a network meta-analysis
- Anchored against every relevant comparator
- Defensible from the first submission
Re-runs on a schedule
- The whole pipeline re-runs on a cadence
- Flags when a new trial moves the result
- A signed record of what changed, each cycle
No black box
- Deterministic statistics — same inputs, same result
- Every estimate traces to its source study
- Change an assumption and re-run
Deliverables that survive a sponsor audit.
We reproduced a published meta-analysis: 3 of 4 endpoints within 6%.
One analyst rebuilt a peer-reviewed meta-analysis end to end in 2 days. Pooled estimates for three of four endpoints landed within 6% of the published values, and the case study explains the fourth. The statistics are deterministic: the same inputs always give the same result.
Read the case studyComparisons a committee will accept
Pairwise and network meta-analysis, plus population-adjusted indirect comparisons, with certainty grading — every step inspectable.
- Network meta-analysis
- MAIC
- STC
- ML-NMR
- Custom methods
- GRADE certainty