From the "Clarification Statement" released to the market on...

From the "Clarification Statement" released to the market on 10-Jan-2018:
When the Carrick Institute advised that the US Clinical Trial had reached the milestone of having
completed data collection, the Company was also notified that the final results of the study would not
be made available to Neurotech or the public until the investigation has been published, as stated in
the announcement of 8 January 2018.

and
Based on our understanding of the nature of these trials, the Company’s expectation now is that the results will become public within a few months of data collection being completed, which will be concurrent with publication of these results and submission to the US FDA.

So while we all "have an idea" of what the results will be based on the interim results announced by the Carrick Institute at Oxford, nobody outside of the Carrick Institute officially knows what the results are.

Additionally, when you say "the Carrick institute has no benefit from publishing poor results" you are supposing that the Carrick Institute cares whether the device succeeds or fails. The fact is they don't. They might be reluctant to publish if they conducted the trial poorly. But a well-run trial that shows the device makes no statistically significant difference provides as much credibility to Carrick as one that shows the device succeeds. This is exactly why the medical profession requires studies to be independent; so the outcome of the trial doesn't influence the decision to publish.

I'm just saying that there's a rising mist of optimism that seems to be based on deeply flawed inferences not justified by the available evidence. Investment decisions should be made on objective facts.