Deconstructing Central Rating In Clinical Trials, Part II

By Juliet Brown, PhD; Joan Busner, PhD; Daniela Chereches; MD, MBA; & Margot Oakley, RN, MSN

Central Rating (CR) in clinical trials is a powerful approach to ensuring unbiased, reliable, and consistent data collection. However, misconceptions about its limitations often overshadow its benefits. CR's core objective is to enhance data validity through the involvement of independent raters, robust training, and streamlined processes that minimize cognitive biases and variability in assessments. Contrary to common beliefs, CRs can efficiently administer assessments without compromising thoroughness, deliver timely ratings to sites, and build rapport with participants while maintaining professional neutrality. Properly trained CRs possess extensive expertise, rigorous objectivity, and an ability to extract meaningful information to support trial success.

CR is distinct from other methods such as Central Quality Reviews, Central Scoring, and Tandem Rating, as it involves direct interaction with participants and generates primary data. It also complements, rather than replaces, site raters, who remain pivotal for subject safety and recruitment. Misconceptions conflating CR with decentralized trial models further obscure its role, as CR focuses on data quality rather than reducing site or participant burden.