CT.gov Evidence Visibility Gap
2026-03-29 | full-registry ct.gov audit | plots, figures, and e156 bundle
Series
IndustrySponsor ClassesPhasesStructuralVisibilityCohortsConditionsConcentration
Visibility Dashboard

Older CT.gov studies fall into four very different visibility states

Reading results tabs and publication links together shows that full visibility is the exception, not the default.

Open dashboardRead E156 paperProtocolSeries hub
State split
Ghost protocols
Full visibility
By phase

Dashboard

Open dashboard at rootRead E156 micro-paperOpen protocolOpen series hub

A publication link is not the same thing as a posted results tab, and the state split makes that visible fast.

How to read the dashboard
Eligible older
249,507
2-year denominator
Ghost protocols
106,606
Neither visible
Ghost rate
42.7%
Older studies
Fully visible
13.7%
Results plus publication
Overall states
EVIDENCE STATESHow older studies split across results-publication visibilityNo results + No publication42.7%No results + Publication30.0%Results + Publication13.7%Results + No publication13.5%
Ghost protocols form the single largest state, while full visibility is comparatively rare.
The state grid is the core figure in this project because it distinguishes partial evidence visibility from true completeness.
Ghost rate by class
GHOST PROTOCOLSGhost-protocol rate by named sponsor classOTHER_GOV49.1%OTHER43.4%INDUSTRY42.7%INDIV42.4%NETWORK33.0%NIH26.1%FED24.4%
OTHER_GOV is worst on ghost protocols, with OTHER and INDUSTRY still carrying very high rates.
This chart isolates the purest hidden state: no results tab and no linked paper trail.
Fully visible by class
FULL VISIBILITYShare of older studies with both results and publication by named sponsor classFED33.5%NIH31.1%INDUSTRY20.2%NETWORK18.4%INDIV15.6%OTHER10.1%OTHER_GOV3.0%
FED and NIH lead on full visibility, while OTHER_GOV remains near the floor.
This is the positive mirror of the ghost chart and helps show who is actually making evidence visible on both channels.
Ghost rate by phase
GHOST PROTOCOLS BY PHASEGhost-protocol rates among the largest phase groupsPHASE161.5%EARLY_PHASE156.5%nan45.8%PHASE1 | PHASE236.5%PHASE435.8%PHASE2 | PHASE335.5%PHASE233.3%PHASE327.1%
Phase I and early phase I remain especially prone to ghost protocols among large phase groups.
Phase structure still matters after the visibility state split is imposed.
Read Across Projects

Across The Series

Each project isolates a different dimension of registry opacity, but the point is the contrast between them, not a single leaderboard.

Industry
CT.gov Industry Disclosure Gap

Industry-focused missing-results stock, sponsor backlogs, and structural sparsity inside CT.gov.

Sponsor Classes
CT.gov Sponsor-Class Hiddenness

Sponsor-class comparisons on rate, stock, and structural hiddenness rather than one flattened ranking.

Phases
CT.gov Phase Reporting Gap

Phase-by-phase disclosure gaps showing how silence changes along the development pathway.

Structural
CT.gov Structural Missingness

Field-level missingness across publication links, IPD statements, descriptions, and locations.

Cohorts
CT.gov Completion Cohort Debt

Completion-era reporting debt showing how older eligible cohorts drift on no-results and ghost-protocol rates.

Conditions
CT.gov Condition Hiddenness Map

Keyword-classified therapeutic-area hiddenness mapping across common condition families.

Concentration
CT.gov Sponsor Backlog Concentration

Concentration and inequality analysis showing how much unresolved stock sits inside a thin sponsor slice.

Source on GitHub | Project home | Dashboard