Pre-registration for assessment validation studies — should it be mandatory?

Spent the morning reading three vendor whitepapers that all claim their assessment is validated. None of them disclose a pre-registered analysis plan. Two of them retro-fit the validation criteria to the data. The third doesn't disclose the criteria at all. If we want this field to be defensible we should be insisting on the same standards we expect of clinical trials. Strong claims invited.

3 replies

Strong yes. The vendor incentive structure makes post-hoc validation almost guaranteed; pre-registration is the cheapest way to interrupt that. The harder question is who enforces it. Industry self-regulation has failed in every adjacent domain.

Agree on the principle. Disagree on "mandatory" — it raises the cost-of-entry in a way that locks in incumbents. I'd start with disclosure norms enforced by buyers, not regulators.

Vendor-side perspective: we pre-register and we lose deals to competitors who don't because their numbers look cleaner. There needs to be a buyer-side norm before this becomes a competitive feature instead of a competitive liability.

Sign in to join the community and add a reply.