Public comment period · §3
Draft format of the supplier dossier series — disposition
The disposition of every submission and the amendments that resulted.
§3Disposition and amendments
§3.1Disposition table
Table 1. Every submission with its disposition. Each row links to the submission in full.
| Reference | Respondent | Point raised | Disposition |
|---|---|---|---|
| DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/009 | Ludmila Brackenridge | A superseded version should remain reachable from the version that replaced it | Noted, no amendment |
| DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/003 | Dr Liesbeth Zaleski-Mbeki | A withdrawn document should not simply disappear | Accepted |
| DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/006 | Dr Kamila Glendinning-Uche | Declared interests should appear on the document rather than on a separate page | Noted, no amendment |
| DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/005 | Zdenka Ximenes industry | The document should not describe uses outside the approved indication | Not accepted |
| DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/008 | Dr Matthias Whitmarsh-Obi | Quantitative claims are reproduced without the method that produced them | Accepted |
| DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/010 | Dr Fenella Lavrentiev | The front matter delays the reader from reaching the assessment | Accepted in part |
| DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/007 | Dr Wilhelmina Wintringham | A multi-part document does not indicate how many parts it has | Noted, no amendment |
| DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/002 | Dr Liesbeth Delacroix-Njoku | The search date is not on the face of the document | Accepted |
| DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/004 | Dr Eamon Immelmann | References should carry a persistent identifier for every cited source | Accepted in part |
| DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/001 | Dr Henrike Jastrzębska | The registry is published only as pages and not in a form that can be processed | Accepted |
| 10 submissions in total. | |||
§3.2Summary by disposition
Table 2. Counts by disposition, with the meaning of each.
| Disposition | Count | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Accepted | 4 | The submission is accepted and the draft is amended as proposed. The amendment is recorded in the amendment log of the document it changed and is traceable to the numbered submission. |
| Accepted in part | 2 | Part of the submission is accepted and part is not. The secretariat response states which part is which and on what ground the remainder was declined. |
| Noted, no amendment | 3 | The submission raises a point the Institute accepts but that does not require a change to the draft, most often because the draft already states it elsewhere. The location is given in the response. |
| Not accepted | 1 | The submission is not accepted. The secretariat response gives the reason. A submission that is not accepted remains published in full; the Institute does not remove a submission because it disagrees with it. |
§3.3Resulting amendments
- A withdrawn document should not simply disappear — arising from DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/003. A withdrawn document is now replaced at its own address by a notice recording its identifier, its title, the date and ground of withdrawal, and a link to whatever supersedes it, and the withdrawal is recorded in the corrections log.
- Quantitative claims are reproduced without the method that produced them — arising from DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/008. Every quantitative claim now carries the determination that produced it at the point of use, and figures obtained by non-comparable methods are no longer presented in the same row or sentence.
- The front matter delays the reader from reaching the assessment — arising from DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/010. Every document now opens with its assessment statement and its certainty rating, with the identifiers, dates and declarations following immediately beneath rather than above, so that the first thing read is the finding and the second is its provenance.
- The search date is not on the face of the document — arising from DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/002. The search date is now printed adjacent to every certainty rating and is carried in the document metadata, so that the interval between the search and the reading is visible without reference to the methods section.
- References should carry a persistent identifier for every cited source — arising from DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/004. Every reference without a persistent identifier now carries an explicit statement that the identifier is not held by the Institute, so that its absence is a recorded fact rather than an apparent oversight.
- The registry is published only as pages and not in a form that can be processed — arising from DRAFT-SUPPLIER-DOS/001. The registry fields are now emitted in a structured form alongside the rendered pages, carrying the identifier, series, type, version, dates, certainty rating and status for every document, and the structured record is regenerated with the site so that it…
References cited on this page
References are numbered in order of first citation in this document. Each superscript in the text links to its entry below.
- International Organization for Standardization. ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories. ISO/IEC Standard 2017;3rd edition. identifier not held by the Institute
Identifiers are reproduced only where the Institute holds them. Where a digital object identifier or PubMed identifier is not shown, the Institute has recorded the journal and year and has not constructed an identifier.
Compound Evidence Institute · CEI-CP-020/3 · https://compoundevidence.com/comment-periods/draft-supplier-dossier-format/disposition/ · retrieved 30 July 2026