Provenance handles supplier selection. It does not handle submitter selection, which is the larger confounder and the one the index cannot measure.
selection_bias
Who submits and why: the index's largest unmeasured confounder.
Section 1
Contribution
Comments technically on records submitted by others. Annotations are signed and are not moderated for agreement.
Records submitted
0
n=0
Annotations
120
n=120
Median purity submitted
suppressed
n=0
n<3 — see individual records
Suppliers covered
0
n=0
This handle has submitted no records. Annotators comment on other people's submissions and are not required to submit.
Section 2
Annotations
Signed technical comments on records. The index does not moderate annotations for agreement with its own arithmetic, and several of these disagree with it. Where a handle has made the same point on several records, one instance is shown and the rest are reachable from the records themselves.
Every headline figure on the corresponding scorecard survives restriction to buyer-sourced records. That sensitivity analysis is published on the scorecard and it is the reason this record can be included at all.
Selection is the largest unmeasured confounder in this dataset and provenance is the one part of it the index can actually measure. That is why the field is mandatory rather than optional.
Blind purchase through an ordinary retail channel is the provenance class this index weights. Nothing prevents anyone from generating one for CPC-2601-D1258; it costs the price of a vial.
The honest summary is that this record establishes a lower bound on what the supplier can produce, and says less about what an arbitrary buyer receives.
The largest unmeasured confounder in this index is who chooses to submit. Coverage on Melanotan II is thin enough that a handful of decisions determines what the compound page says, and the aggregate caveat on every rollup is not boilerplate.
Showing 6 distinct comments of 120 annotations by this handle.