Research systems · Public data · Clinical operations · Company infrastructure
Life-sciences companies do not buy one “biotech stack.” A drug developer, device manufacturer and care-services operator have different evidence chains. This screened map keeps commercial systems, public data and research organizations in separate lanes, then shows where each may become useful
01 · Decision path
The stack grows when a company must reproduce a decision, a study result, a device history or an operating metric for someone outside the team. The first question is what evidence exists and who owns it
Connect literature and molecular evidence to experiment records, study data, regulatory submissions and the financing narrative. AI discovery tools help interrogate evidence; they do not replace traceable source data
CSO · CMO · clinical operations · CFOTrace device identity, design controls, risk files, quality events and clinical evidence. A public device database is a reference layer; the manufacturer's controlled quality record is a separate system
Regulatory · quality · product · CFOKeep patient care and revenue-cycle systems distinct from public reimbursement datasets, then explain payer exposure, site-level economics, compliance and acquisition integration in investor materials
COO · CFO · clinical leadership · GC02 · Source-led technology map
Each entry answers one practical question and links to the owner of the underlying resource or product. Filters narrow the examples; all entries remain readable without JavaScript
Use it to find biomedical citations and abstracts while checking the literature behind a mechanism, endpoint or clinical claim. PubMed is a literature search resource; its record does not by itself validate an issuer's interpretation
Search predicted protein structures as a research input. A prediction can support exploration, but experimental validation and program-specific interpretation remain separate evidence
Check registered study status, design, sponsor, endpoints and posted results. Sponsors or investigators submit the records; registry presence is not government approval of a study's scientific quality
Use FDA's approval and product databases to check drug and biologic status, approved labeling and related records. The exact database depends on the product type; a pipeline asset should never be described as approved from a registry entry alone
Search or download FDA-submitted device identification information tied to unique device identifiers. It helps identify marketed devices; it is not a substitute for clearance, approval or a manufacturer's design-history and quality files
Explore Medicare and Medicaid program use, payments, provider and beneficiary datasets. These public aggregates can frame reimbursement exposure, but company-level unit economics still require internal records
Find registration statements, amendments, prospectuses, exhibits and ongoing issuer filings. This is the public filing backbone for checking what a comparable company actually disclosed, not a substitute for its private diligence record
The company describes an enterprise AI workspace for scientific evidence retrieval, biomedical knowledge graphs and research workflows. Evaluate source traceability, private-data boundaries and output review before using generated conclusions in a regulated decision
Benchling describes a connected environment for experiment records, biological registry, samples, inventory and research workflows, with separate AI capabilities. Ask which records are controlled, which remain exploratory and how data moves into regulated processes
Dotmatics presents a scientific software portfolio spanning informatics, lab workflows, analysis and AI-supported data management. Map the specific product to the experimental data type instead of treating the entire portfolio as one interchangeable system
Medidata describes Rave as an electronic data capture system for collecting, managing, cleaning and reporting clinical trial data. Assess study setup, data provenance and extraction needs separately from trial-operations document control
Veeva lists CTMS, eTMF and related applications for study management and trial documentation. A trial master file and an EDC dataset answer different review questions even when systems connect
The company describes a medical-device quality system connecting document control, design controls, risk, CAPA, complaints and post-market work. Verify the precise modules and validation evidence needed for the device's regulatory pathway
MasterControl lists connected quality processes including document control, training, change control, audits, risk and quality events. Those workflow categories describe the product family; they do not establish whether a particular deployment satisfies a company's validation duties
athenahealth describes an integrated electronic health record, billing, practice-management and patient-engagement platform for ambulatory practices. In diligence, separate clinical documentation from revenue-cycle and payer-performance evidence
Epic describes electronic health record software used by health systems and clinics. Its presence in an organization does not, on its own, explain reimbursement, clinical quality or the economics of a multi-site healthcare-services company
Datasite describes healthcare and life-sciences rooms for diligence, fundraising, licensing and IPO work. Compare the actual workflow and quote before selecting a project configuration
Firmex describes biotech and pharma rooms for financing, licensing and confidential collaboration. Test partner separation and activity reporting with a representative package
Ideals describes life-sciences workflows for clinical-trial sharing and clinical archiving. Establish whether a transaction room or a controlled archive is the primary need
Intralinks describes a life-sciences deal platform for secure collaboration and diligence, including business-development and licensing work
Peony describes NDA-gated access, watermarks, granular permissions, activity history and AI-supported search for biotech sharing and review. Peony operates this site; these are its own claims
ShareVault describes confidential rooms for biotech, pharma, medtech and CRO teams, including licensing, fundraising and regulatory review
No example matches both filters. Broaden a filter to see the full map
03 · Research institutions
These are organizations with a specific public data resource, research method, collaboration route or funding entry point. An institution is not a software vendor, and its presence here does not imply that a company can obtain funding, data access or a partnership
The NIH center offers preclinical and clinical research toolboxes, funding information and a separate licensing route. Start at the relevant resource or opportunity rather than treating NCATS as a single open dataset
Its services catalogue links molecular data resources, analysis tools and submission services. Check each resource's access and licensing terms separately; an institute-wide label does not establish the terms for every dataset
The NCI program provides a repository and knowledge base for cancer genomic studies, including standardized molecular and clinical research data. Some records require controlled access; exploratory research data are not product-specific clinical proof
Its NHQDR data tools provide national and state healthcare-quality measures and benchmarks. These are system-level context for care delivery; they do not reveal a particular operator's quality performance or unit economics
The Medical Device Innovation Consortium is a public-private collaboration in medical-device regulatory science and publishes a resource library. Its reports can frame a device-development question; membership and project participation are separate decisions
The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative convenes trial stakeholders and publishes trial-design practices and resources. Use a specific recommendation or tool for a study-design question, not the organization's name as evidence that a protocol is valid
PCORI funds patient-centered comparative clinical effectiveness research and publishes funding opportunities and funded-project information. An open opportunity is not a general operating grant; eligibility and scope must be checked in the specific call
04 · Screening method
The first pass asks whether a sector-specific decision maker can actually use the resource, verify its stated function and identify the record it produces. This is a curated entry cohort, not an attempt to enumerate every company or institution in life sciences
A resource enters the public map when an official page identifies a concrete tool, dataset, method or collaboration route and the corresponding workflow is clear. Commercial claims remain attributed to their providers
General-purpose AI or cloud software, CRO and CDMO services, market-intelligence subscriptions and individual university labs stay in the research queue until an exact use case, access route and source page can be documented
Paid placement lists, unsupported rankings, generic prestige signals and claims inferred from a missing webpage do not enter this map. Absence from the map says nothing about a provider's quality or capability
Secure diligence rooms are now included as a distinct workflow layer. Use the life-sciences data room selection guide to compare their documented use cases and run a consistent buyer test. Peony operates this site and is included in that cohort
05 · Selection questions
These questions make tools comparable within their own category. A public registry, AI research workspace, electronic health record and controlled diligence room should not share one score
Identify the system of record, the reviewer, the correction path and the export format. A polished summary cannot replace the experiment, study, quality or encounter record behind it
For every AI conclusion or board-level number, preserve the source, version, date and human approval. Ask what survives when the vendor account, model or team changes
Internal R&D, regulated quality, patient data and investor diligence have different access needs. Document the handoff between systems before buying another shared workspace
Test the workflow with the people who generate records. The CFO's reporting view depends on the scientist, clinician or quality team's ability to keep the underlying data current
06 · Methodology and limits
This is a curated map of 22 technology and data examples across seven workflow layers, plus seven research organizations, checked against official pages on 23 September 2026. Selection illustrates distinct jobs in the evidence chain and is not exhaustive market coverage. A vendor's description is attributed to that vendor; no capability has been independently tested here
The map contains no price estimates, implementation-time claims, compliance certifications or relative performance ratings. It does not establish procurement suitability. Public databases may contain submitted or incomplete records, so material decisions require verification against the primary record and the company's own controlled evidence
Editorial boundary No provider is ranked or scored. Peony operates this site and is among the listed providers. Each secure-diligence entry links to a provider source and a buyer validation question appears in the selection guide