Loading…
Source catalogue method
Every source in the catalogue is scored out of 100 on how well it can be trusted as a reference, then placed in a band. The rating describes the source as a document — its publisher, version, currency and traceability. It says nothing about whether the guidance inside it fits the patient in front of you.
Every source is scored out of 100 across six dimensions, shown here in weight order. How the source is assured and who published it carry most of the outcome.
100 points at full marks on every dimension.
A clean score falls into one of three bands. The two below are not reached by score at all — they are applied first, on identity, lifecycle and governance grounds.
Complete metadata, an authoritative publisher and a current, validated version.
Browse A · PreferredSound and usable, with one weaker dimension such as currency or applicability.
Browse B · StrongUsable as supporting material alongside a stronger source, not on its own.
Browse C · SupplementaryBelow 50, incomplete metadata, or material identity or verification uncertainty at any score.
Browse D · Review requiredApplied before any score when lifecycle or governance rules reject the source, including an identified replacement.
Browse ExcludedWhere the score stops. Absent metadata is recorded as unknown and demoted, never inferred and never rounded up.
Local relevance is capped
Australian applicability is bounded within 15 points. Weak Australian material cannot bypass identity, validation, lifecycle or evidence-quality controls.
Nothing is inferred
Missing fields remain unknown. The catalogue does not infer publisher, jurisdiction, evidence type, version, approval or currentness from titles or prose.
Missing metadata is demoted, not guessed
Missing publisher, version, dates, jurisdiction, evidence type or validation forces D · Review required. A past expiry receives no current currency credit; a source with an identified replacement is excluded.
What this rating is not. This organisational rating is not RAG relevance or patient-specific guidance, specialist sign-off, clinical endorsement, or a measurement of factual truth.
Four independent axes. A source can be current and still unverified, or approved and no longer active.
Whether the publisher still considers this version in date.
Whether the source has been checked locally, and how far that check went.
Whether the catalogue still uses the source, or only retains it.
How much of the source the catalogue actually holds.