Built for the work. Proven in practice.

You can, and for one narrow job you sometimes should — but you’ll pay the integration tax. Best-of-breed across registration, anonymization, writing and tracking means re-keyed data at every seam, four audit trails that don’t reconcile, and accountability gaps exactly where deadlines get missed: the anonymized Policy 0070 package is ready, the registry record was never updated, and no single vendor owns the gap. One platform removes those handoffs — the same document, dataset and registry record move through anonymization, writing, disclosure and tracking under one audit trail. If a point tool really is better for one step, keep it; just be clear who reconciles the seams.

You can — to us — but keep the option to insource. The platform stays the same in every delivery mode: license it and run it with your own people, co-deliver alongside our specialists, or hand the work over entirely. Because the software, your templates, the rules and the audit trail do not change, moving between modes is a staffing decision, not a migration — no data export, no rebuild, no retraining on a different tool. That matters when a portfolio spikes, a team is rebuilt, or a sponsor decides mid-program to bring transparency work back in house.

Strong single-function vendors and capable services firms — that is the honest answer. Some are very good at one thing: a registry tool, a standalone redaction product, a writing team billed by the hour. What none of those categories does is cover registration, anonymization, medical writing and compliance tracking in one system, under one audit trail, with the option to license, co-deliver or outsource. That is why the comparison above is by category rather than by name: category comparisons age well and stay fair as products change. Send us your shortlist and we will tell you where we are the weaker fit.

No. Most customers start with one product — usually ANONYMIZE or LINK AI — and expand as requirements stack; each is licensed separately. Because every product works from the same study record, the portfolio view is there from the first one you turn on.

That is the point of offering three. License and run it in-house, run it alongside our specialists, or hand the function over entirely — and move between them as your team and volume change. Because all three run on the same platform, switching changes who does the work, not your tooling, templates or audit history.

By answering a narrower question: who is accountable for the output, and can you show your work. No AI output reaches a health authority without a named specialist signing off, every drafted statement carries the source document and passage it came from, and every transformation is logged and attributable. The Trust Center documents how that is enforced rather than asserted.