Capsules record what the source documents say, with the distinctive items in bold — the things that turn up on the gap matrix. Where a vendor publishes little, the capsule is short rather than padded out with marketing language; that asymmetry is in the sources, not a judgment about the products.
Reading the survey
Three patterns are worth naming before the matrix.
- The open-source tools compete on modules; the commercial tools compete on workflow. teal, DaVinci and tidyCDISC lead with how many analyses they offer. JReview, elluminate, CluePoints and Empirica lead with what happens around the analysis — who reviewed what, what changed, what was raised and how it closed. This portfolio has been competing in the first race and is not entered in the second.
- The patient profile is the universal object. Ten of thirteen platforms have one, and it is usually the destination of every other display. Ours shipped in July; hub#75 is already growing it. The survey’s message is that the growth direction should be more domains, not more lab detail — every other platform’s profile spans AE, CM, exposure, medical history and visits.
- Nobody has solved the hepatic abnormal-baseline case. Five platforms ship an eDISH plot. None ships the baseline-referenced composite or the ALT waterfall for populations enrolled with elevated baseline liver tests, which is exactly where eDISH’s quadrants stop meaning anything. That is a real lead, published in 2024 and 2025 and implemented here within months.