Know when your trial documents disagree
CTD identifies which clinical-trial documents may be stale, which remain consistent, and why.
Assess the impact of a protocol amendment across consent forms, country versions, translations, and site materials—or let CTD monitor your public trial documents and alert you when a potential discrepancy appears.
One change can affect hundreds of documents
A protocol amendment rarely stays within the protocol.
The change may need to reach participant consent forms, translated materials, country-specific versions, site documents, and other approved content. Today, experienced teams often have to find those dependencies through manual review, spreadsheets, and institutional knowledge.
That process is slow, difficult to reproduce, and vulnerable to one outdated sentence surviving in one document.
CTD provides the change-control layer between the source of a change and every document that depends on it.
Review what matters—not everything again
CTD calculates the downstream impact of a change and gives reviewers a focused, evidence-backed worklist.
Your team remains in control of every decision. CTD makes the review surface smaller, clearer, and easier to defend.
What a finding looks like
Every reported difference arrives with the quotations, the versions, and the reviewer decision still open.
CTD does not send a generic notification that two files are different. Each finding carries the exact quotations from both sources, the country and language involved, and a link to the public source.
Continuous monitoring of your public trial record
Important discrepancies do not only appear during a planned amendment workflow.
A new consent form may be published in one country. A translated version may retain an earlier value. A document may be replaced without the corresponding protocol or participant material being updated. These changes can remain difficult to see when documents are spread across registries, countries, languages, and versions.
CTD can monitor the supported public sources for your trials and alert your team when:
This gives clinical operations, regulatory operations, and quality teams an independent early-warning system for the public trial record.
Every alert includes the evidence
CTD does not send a generic notification that two files are different.
Each alert can include:
Your team can quickly determine whether the difference is expected, country-specific, already controlled internally, or requires corrective action.
Start without an internal integration
Public-document monitoring provides a simple way to begin using CTD.
You tell us which trials to monitor. CTD builds an initial baseline from the available public documents, identifies existing questions, and then checks new or revised publications against that baseline.
No access to internal systems is required for the initial service.
If a potential discrepancy is found, your team receives an evidence-backed alert for review. Internal documents can later be added to provide earlier detection and a more complete change-control record.
Prioritise the discrepancies with the greatest potential impact
Not every inconsistency deserves the same urgency.
CTD helps teams prioritise differences involving:
Routine administrative differences do not compete with potentially important participant-facing issues for attention.
From change to review-ready evidence
Deterministic where trust matters
CTD is not a black-box model making approval decisions.
Its repeatable comparison, evidence checking, dependency tracing, and reporting are deterministic: the same evidence produces the same result.
AI can assist with initial document reading or genuinely ambiguous passages inside an approved environment, but it cannot silently approve, overwrite, or bypass the evidence. Only a named human reviewer can approve a result.
Works with the documents you already have
CTD sits above your existing clinical and regulatory systems.
There is no requirement to replace your authoring platform or migrate approved documents before CTD can help.
Built for multinational trials
A change can reach six language versions and still leave the seventh behind.
CTD treats every country and language version as an independently controlled document. It compares the underlying facts—not only identical wording—so it can assess values expressed through translation, paraphrase, different units, or numbers written as words.
This creates a systematic way to check whether the same clinical meaning reached every required version.
Two ways to start
Monitor your public trials
We establish a baseline for the selected trials, monitor supported public sources for new and revised documents, and alert your team to potential discrepancies.
Assess a completed amendment
Give us one recently amended Phase II or III trial, including the previous and amended protocol and the documents your team reviewed.
We independently produce an amendment impact report before seeing your completed assessment. We then compare the results with what your team actually changed.
Nothing is generated or approved during the assessment.
From public monitoring to internal change control
Public monitoring provides an independent external control. Connecting CTD to internal documents moves detection earlier—before potentially inconsistent material is published.
The service can grow with the organisation:
Document dependencies, sponsor templates, approved relationships, and reviewer decisions become controlled assets that improve future assessments.
Change control for the clinical documents you already have
Public-document findings are review signals, not determinations of regulatory noncompliance. Public sources may be incomplete or appear after an internal change has already been controlled.