For many early-career clinical researchers, trial design can feel rigid. A primary endpoint is selected, the study is powered around it, and success is determined by that single measure. But patients do not experience treatment effects through one outcome. They experience a combination of efficacy, side effects, symptoms, and quality of life. Reducing this to a single outcome can risk missing the bigger picture.
The need for diversity in clinical trials and the challenges of identifying patients who are unknown to the healthcare system complicate trial enrollment and add financial stress that may hinder the success of a study. A targeted, engineered approach to patient enrollment and diversity, using a financially calculable strategy, can ameliorate these challenges.
ACRP Fellow David J. Morin, MD, FACP, CPI, FACRP, reflects on how bringing stakeholders together around a shared purpose can reduce inefficiencies, improve collaboration, and help clinical research better serve patients.
I first became a CRC in 2004, and I love my job. But there is a part of being a CRC that no one talks about enough: the mental weight of always having so much in motion.
For clinical research sites, manual data entry remains a substantial burden that drains resources and increases study timelines. This impact is worsening as clinical trials become increasingly complex, with more endpoints, procedures, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and data sources.