Evidence is checked in separate systems
- LIMS activity is reviewed in the LIMS
- Competency is reviewed in the QMS
- QC, lot and equipment evidence sit elsewhere
- Vertical audits are periodic and manual
Continuous evidence assurance
Know whether the evidence behind a laboratory result still agrees.
Xaloreli reconstructs the evidence thread behind selected results and tests whether independently maintained records agree at the moment the work was performed.
Result threadH26-09184Reconciled 09:42
LIMSAuthorised09:26
IQCAccepted08:54
7 of 8sources agreeCompetencyCurrentAt task
Reagent lotReviewSource mismatch
Evidence break identifiedLot identifier differs between LIMS and stock record
Who it supports
One assurance environment, shaped around different responsibilities.
Select a role to see how Xaloreli supports the work without removing professional ownership.
The assurance gap
Complete records do not always mean a complete evidence thread.
Laboratory systems are designed to control different parts of the service. The unresolved risk often sits between them.
The result becomes the common evidence anchor
- Sources are compared at the relevant timestamp
- Contradictions are surfaced with context
- Sampling is weighted by quality risk
- Confirmed findings return to existing workflows
How it works
A continuous vertical audit around the reported result.
Xaloreli does not replace the systems laboratories already use. It verifies the joins between them.
Select
Results are sampled using governed risk criteria such as new lots, post-maintenance activity, temporary staff and recent EQA concerns.
Reconstruct
A time-bounded thread connects the result to operator, competency, IQC, lot, equipment, SOP, roster and EQA evidence.
Reconcile
Transparent rules test whether each source supports the same operational reality at the moment of work.
Resolve
Authorised reviewers confirm or dismiss breaks. Genuine findings follow the laboratory's existing QMS route.
Platform coverage
Follow the evidence from source activity to governed assurance.
Each capability contributes to one continuous thread. Select an area for a practical overview, or open the full platform page for the complete workflow.
Use cases
Designed for everyday assurance, not only assessment preparation.
Select a scenario to see the evidence, decision and operational outcome.
Integration approach
Start with the exports you already use.
File-first pilots allow laboratories to test source availability, rule accuracy and value before deeper integration. APIs and supported vendor connections can follow where justified.
Explore integrationsLIMSQMSIQCEQA
XaloreliEvidence reconciliationEquipmentReagentsRosterPOCT
Trust by design
Clinical records remain controlled by their source systems.
Xaloreli is designed around read-only clinical integrations, least-privilege access, traceable rules, source fingerprints and human confirmation before approved QMS write-back.
Role-based accessEncryption in transit and at restImmutable decision historyTime-limited review accessSource-level traceabilityData minimisation
Read the trust and governance approachQuestions and answers
Answers for laboratory service users
Open a question to understand how the service fits into operational and quality work.
No. The same result-level evidence model can support internal vertical audits, investigations, management review, network governance and targeted assurance. ISO 15189 mapping is used where it is relevant to the accredited service.
No. Those platforms remain the systems of record. Xaloreli checks whether their independently maintained records agree and sends confirmed findings into approved existing workflows.
The intended model uses existing operational evidence rather than creating a parallel routine record. Pilot work confirms what can be sourced reliably and where controlled manual input is genuinely needed.
The reviewer sees the source states, timestamps and rule outcome. An authorised person confirms or dismisses the break before any finding is sent into the existing QMS.
No. The proposed assessor workspace is scoped, read-only, logged and time-limited. The laboratory controls the selected samples, evidence scope and access period.
Yes. Result threads can support internal vertical audits, targeted investigations, management review and follow-up after maintenance, lot changes or external-quality concerns. The laboratory still defines the scope and makes the professional decision.
The evidence model is designed to follow the accredited service across departments, hospital sites, wards and community delivery points. Local device, operator and governance evidence can remain distinct while being reviewed through one assurance structure.
No. The public website and interactive demonstration use fictional records. Visitors should not submit patient-identifiable or confidential laboratory information through the website.
Choose your next step
Explore the concept, enter your workspace or discuss a focused use case.
New to XaloreliExplore the interactive demoUse synthetic records to inspect the proposed assurance workflow.Existing customerCustomer login coming soonThe secure production workspace will open when deployment and access controls are complete.Laboratory or partnerDiscuss a focused pilotStart with one evidence problem, discipline and realistic source scope.
Pilot with purpose
Test the evidence model with one discipline and real export constraints.
A focused pilot can validate source mapping, rule accuracy, false-positive control, evidence coverage and time saved against manual vertical audit.