Paper
Actual dates and actual enrollment matter because they anchor the basic chronology and realized scale of a closed study. Missing them leaves the record harder to interpret.
Which named sponsors fail the CT.gov actual-field discipline test on missing actual completion and actual enrollment fields? We analysed 249,507 eligible older closed interventional studies from the March 29, 2026 full-registry snapshot. We ranked named sponsors with at least 100 older studies by any actual-field gap, then compared rate outliers, sponsor-class rates, and counts across actual completion and actual enrollment fields. Boehringer Ingelheim carried the largest actual-discipline stock at 943 studies, followed by NCI at 615 and Novartis Pharmaceuticals at 292. Gynecologic Oncology Group had the sharpest large-sponsor actual-discipline rate at 83.8 percent, while NIH and NETWORK were highest among sponsor classes at 24.5 and 23.4 percent. The actual-field problem is not cosmetic because it obscures whether closed studies reported real completion timing and realized sample size with the discipline expected from mature trial records. These counts reflect missing registry fields among older closed studies and do not by themselves establish rule violations or intentional concealment.