{"id":488748,"date":"2024-01-17T08:30:03","date_gmt":"2024-01-17T13:30:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/platohealth.ai\/success-in-selectivity-giving-sites-the-power-to-pick-the-right-trials-acrp\/"},"modified":"2024-01-17T16:42:40","modified_gmt":"2024-01-17T21:42:40","slug":"success-in-selectivity-giving-sites-the-power-to-pick-the-right-trials-acrp","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/platohealth.ai\/success-in-selectivity-giving-sites-the-power-to-pick-the-right-trials-acrp\/","title":{"rendered":"Success in Selectivity: Giving Sites the Power to Pick the Right Trials – ACRP","gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"rendered","format":"text"}]},"content":{"rendered":"

This is a sponsored message.<\/h4>\n

The current site selection process has left many research sites unable to realize their full potential, limiting their ability to deliver optimal results. However, amidst these enduring challenges, a shift in power is under way.<\/p>\n

Today, large academic research centers receive the vast majority of trial opportunities, leaving countless other sites constrained by studies that don\u2019t align with their strengths. It\u2019s not uncommon for experienced and motivated sites to accept the majority of opportunities that come their way, even when it\u2019s not the best match for their team and patients. This results in highly qualified sites underperforming across trials \u2013 not because they lack the ability to deliver results, but because they lack the power to be strategic and selective in choosing trials.<\/p>\n

I am optimistic that the tides are turning in the clinical trial ecosystem. New tech solutions, coupled with heightened U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) pressure on sponsors, are tipping the balance in favor of research sites, granting them the power to be more selective. It sounds counterintuitive to refuse opportunities when, in the current climate, many sites don\u2019t have a guarantee for the next time they\u2019ll be offered a trial. However, as we see the FDA diversity plans go into effect and a focus on community relationships takes the spotlight, the sites that see the most success will be the ones that are picky about which trials they take on.<\/p>\n

Refusing wrong-fit trials doesn\u2019t mean limiting opportunities, it means taking the reins and ultimately seeing long-term benefits like saving time, establishing a reputation as a high performer, building a robust track record for securing the right trials, and avoiding unnecessary challenges.<\/p>\n

In my current role, working closely with both sites and sponsors on our marketplace, I\u2019ve had the privilege of listening to the pain points and priorities of both sides. Based on these insights, here are three steps I believe will grant sites the power of being picky:<\/p>\n


Step 1: Be proactive in defining your ideal trials<\/strong><\/p>\n

When faced with a new trial opportunity, getting the necessary details to make an informed decision is not only time-consuming, it\u2019s incredibly rare. Sponsors often fall short in giving sites enough information upfront to enable confident decision-making. While sites may not have the ability to change this dynamic, they can take charge by proactively establishing criteria with their teams for identifying the right-fit trials.<\/p>\n

How? By answering questions like:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. What do my local patients need most and when in terms of clinical trials?<\/li>\n
  2. What types of trials and therapeutic areas do my Principal Investigators or Sub-Investigators have the most successful experience in?<\/li>\n
  3. What needs and areas do I have the greatest patient population to support?<\/li>\n
  4. Where could I contribute to the inclusion of underrepresented patient populations that would help sponsors achieve diversity goals?<\/li>\n
  5. What protocol components have proven most challenging for my site in the past?<\/li>\n
  6. What disease areas do I have the best community connections or programs to screen and recruit patients for?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Sites can confidently navigate trial opportunities to ensure they align with their strengths and needs.<\/p>\n

    The answers to these questions will be the compass to navigating the decision-making process more efficiently. Some sponsor criteria are absolute, so when the answers to these questions indicate a trial might not be the right fit, the decision to move on to opportunities that promise a more valuable use of the site\u2019s time is made easier.<\/p>\n


    Step 2: Tell the full story<\/strong><\/p>\n

    The traditional data sources sponsors have access to when selecting sites are typically limited to trial experience, historical performance, and staff CV details. Not only does this mean sponsors are making decisions without the full story, but also sites with rich community connections and experienced teams aren\u2019t able to showcase the full scope of their strengths. New technology solutions, including Inato\u2019s marketplace, are changing how sites present their qualifications to sponsors and putting the spotlight on important attributes like:<\/p>\n