Three rows were donor-significant overall; only one was an initial headline flag.
Biomedical methods review
Before a claim becomes expensive, we try to break it.
Nine Names audits the source map, pipeline defaults, donor and cohort support, and failure modes before a biomedical claim earns a safe handoff.
-
01
Claim received
Identify the claim, decision context, and what would make it useful or unsafe.
-
02
Source mapped
Track datasets, tissue, platform, access, metadata, and missing artifacts.
-
03
Defaults audited
Treat QC filters, normalization anchors, and matrix construction as testable choices.
-
04
Donor/cohort checks
Separate cell-level signals from donor-level and cross-cohort support.
-
05
Failure modes challenged
Ask whether the signal is disease, age, assay, stage, selection, or artifact.
-
06
Safe handoff or hold
Publish only public-safe summaries; controlled material waits for qualified review.
Recent audit spotlight: ALS
We audited whether ALS signals survived donors, cohorts, and pipeline checks.
ALS is the current reviewed example, not the company category. The spotlight shows how Nine Names turns a biological claim into checks before language.
Signals are separated by source, assay, and replication posture.
Filters, anchors, and pooled-cell certainty can all change the story.
No treatment advice or prescriptions; physicians and PIs decide.
Recent examples
Other public-safe examples.
Each example shows a public-safe verdict and inspection rows; dense source tables wait for qualified review.
Public boundary check
Overstrong claims get held, narrowed, or routed to qualified review before publication.
Claims without source-checked backing stay request-only or held.
Medical decisions stay with physicians, PIs, and qualified reviewers.
Evidence snapshot
Evidence snapshot from current audit
- Axes tested
- 80
- Initial cell-level flags
- 23
- Headline flags surviving donor gate
- 1/23
- Screened findings
- 2,255
- Tiered findings
- 596
- Replicated-status findings
- 287
What we actually did
What reviewers can inspect.
A claim moves only after sources, defaults, donor/cohort support, and failure modes are checked. The figures show the public-safe shape of that inspection.
Audit method
Checks before claims.
Each row names the check, the failure mode, and the output we expect before public language gets sharper.
Donor-level check
- Failure mode
- Cell-level p-values can overstate donor-level evidence.
- Output
- donor p / donor count
Cohort tiering
- Failure mode
- Same-donor or same-assay support can look like replication.
- Output
- replication tier
Normalization audit
- Failure mode
- Housekeeping anchors and baselines can move with disease.
- Output
- stress flag
QC sensitivity
- Failure mode
- Filters can remove the stressed cells that matter.
- Output
- sensitivity note
Source map
- Failure mode
- Unavailable or missing artifacts raise evidence risk.
- Output
- shown / request / held
Clinical boundary
- Failure mode
- Therapeutic language can turn into advice.
- Output
- rewrite / hold
Full source tables are request-only; the public page shows the audit shape.
Audit outcomes
Labels come after the work.
Survives
The narrow claim survived source, method, and donor/cohort checks.
Caveat
The signal is useful, but limited by cohort, assay, metadata, or review access.
Hold
The material stays off the public page until source checks and safety checks pass.
Rewrite
The claim was too broad, too clinical, or too strong for the evidence.
Boundaries
What we do not do.
Public
- Allowed
- summary figures
- Blocked
- source tables, patient files
Qualified review
- Allowed
- source notes, reviewer packet
- Blocked
- anonymous download
Offline
- Allowed
- unreviewed work, sensitive records
- Blocked
- web publication
Medical decisions
- Allowed
- physician/PI review
- Blocked
- Nine Names advice
Clinical decisions stay with physicians and PIs. No prescriptions, recruitment, or treatment instructions.
Contact
Verified review contact
Send role, claim, and source question. Do not send patient files or treatment requests.