Paper
Condition asymmetry separates broad-narrative loss from endpoint loss and shows that the therapeutic ranking changes once those two text layers are compared directly.
Which condition families show the biggest imbalance between missing detailed descriptions and missing primary-outcome-only text in older CT.gov records? We analysed 249,507 eligible older closed interventional studies from the March 29, 2026 full-registry snapshot using one condition-family label per study. We compared description-only gaps against primary-only gaps and defined net text asymmetry as description-only minus primary-only counts and rates. Other led the condition-family text-asymmetry table at 7,699 net description-only gaps, followed by Musculoskeletal and pain at 2,521, Healthy volunteers at 2,134, and Cardiovascular at 1,802. Immunology and dermatology had the highest condition asymmetry rate at 19.7 percentage points, while Healthy volunteers reached 15.1 points and Neurology 15.0 points. The asymmetry lens shows which therapeutic portfolios lose the broader study narrative much more often than the endpoint sentence, changing how text opacity is distributed for readers. Positive asymmetry does not by itself prove concealment; it shows which field disappears more often inside mature public registry records overall.