Article | March 3, 2017

Alternative Fact: Site Identification Is Not Critical To Clinical Trial Efficiency

Alternative Fact: Site Identification Is Not Critical To Clinical Trial Efficiency

By Craig Morgan, goBalto

On the surface this may seem to have some validity, as sponsors and contract research organizations (CROs) often lack a transparent, evidence-based strategy for this task. Instead, they frequently rely on archaic paper-based or spreadsheet methods to identify sites across the globe with a reasonable chance of enrolling the contracted number of patients on schedule, and the ability to generate quality data. Moreover, the practice of adding more sites per study than necessary and requiring each site to recruit fewer subjects per site is a standard, although questionable, risk mitigation practice. So how important can site identification be to the efficiency of clinical trials?

VIEW THE ARTICLE!
Signing up provides unlimited access to:
Signing up provides unlimited access to:
  • Trend and Leadership Articles
  • Case Studies
  • Extensive Product Database
  • Premium Content
HELLO. PLEASE LOG IN. X

Not yet a member of Clinical Leader? Register today.

ACCOUNT SIGN UP X
Please fill in your account details
Login Information
I'm interested in newsletter subscriptions.
ACCOUNT SIGN UP

Subscriptions

Sign up for the newsletter that brings you the industry's latest news, technologies, trends and products.

You might also want to: