ProofPilot

In clinical trials, some things just take up too many resources and add complexity. Kind of like the Thanksgiving side dish someone spends hours preparing that takes up space at the table and no one touches. 😜 We want to know: which Thanksgiving side are you deprioritizing without regret? Vote below! And don't worry, we're not judging...we're just collecting the data. 😅

First trial? Sixth trial? Twenty years engaged in the healthcare system? None of that changes the fact that trial participants need to be guided at every step. When participant engagement in clinical trials is done right, it: ✔️ Improves adherence with study tasks ✔️ Reduces drop-off ✔️ Enhances the overall trial experience ✔️ Boosts patient trust in clinical research So what is “done right,” you might ask? 📄 Step-by-step guidance delivered at the right time through every stage of the trial 📂 Centralized, organized study content, resources, and third party tech/services 💬 Clear communication channels for questions ⚙️ Tailored support for study tech When patients speak, we listen. Sponsors, are you listening, too? Let’s work together to deliver what they need.

We're #hiring a new Director of Strategic Partnerships & Channel Sales (CRO) in New York, New York. Apply today or share this post with your network.

Site engagement. Patient Experience. Your pharma company might be treating them separately, but really, they’re two sides of the same coin. This siloed approach is limiting and ultimately hurts both sites and patients. The disconnect between site engagement and patient engagement teams: ❌ Reduces the volume of ideas ❌ Prevents solution ideation and adoption ❌ Creates friction around funding, authority, and implementation ❌ Increases the risk of site AND patient burden If that sounds familiar or nerve-wracking (or both 😬), it’s time to consider a more holistic approach–one that considers improving site engagement as the first step in fostering a better patient experience, not as a standalone operation. In our latest whitepaper, we explore the outcomes of both approaches and outline the best solution for sponsors, sites, and patients alike. Ready for this deeper dive? Check out the comments! 👇

We're #hiring a new Senior Clinical Program Manager in New York, New York. Apply today or share this post with your network.

We're #hiring a new Vice President Marketing in Boston, Massachusetts. Apply today or share this post with your network.

The fall conference season was a whirlwind, to say the least. But across every event, we noticed a pattern of 5 themes study sponsors need to hear. 👇 1️⃣ Sites are struggling! And they’ll continue to do so without adequate sponsor support. Sponsors need to be committed to forging strong site relationships and understanding the day-to-day challenges of sites. And if they aren’t? Their studies will suffer, and sites will prioritize studies where they’re more supported. 2️⃣ Complexity is a silent killer. Disjointed resources, unreliable communication, manual processes, and non-standardized guidance all lead to higher costs, delays, burnout, and errors. 3️⃣ Partnerships aren’t just a “nice to have.” They’re essential to the success of clinical research. BUT, the quality of the partnership is important! Sponsors deserve partners who are committed not just to them, but to the sites, the patients, and the science. 4️⃣ It’s time to get sober about “the future of AI." We’ve had years now to daydream about the possibilities of AI, but it's a distraction. There’s so much we should be doing with it right here, right now - yet aren't. We need to shift the focus to concrete use cases. 5️⃣ We can all agree that patient centricity plays a vital role in trial success. But it needs to be done right: understanding the patient experience, engaging patients at every step from design onward, and learning from them. It's a lot to take in, but these are the challenges we're dedicated to solving for sponsors. Let's talk about how we can support your team. Now it’s your turn! What’s your favorite takeaway from a recent conference?

Who is to blame when you learn that things were not, in fact, running as smoothly at your study sites as you thought they were? The CRA? The site? Sorry, but it was mostly likely you, the Sponsor. The good news is that the biggest and most common threats to your trial’s success can be mitigated: 📉 Low enrollment conversion 🌀 Disorganized content 📄 Missing documentation 🗣️ Communication bottlenecks 🎓 Ineffective training 💤 Poor engagement By simplifying the day-to-day of study conduct, we’ve helped Sponsors to achieve significant reductions in protocol deviations, screen failures, delays, and overall study costs. And what does that translate into? 💉 Faster delivery of new therapies for patients 🛠️ More efficient use of study resources 🤝 Stronger Sponsor-site relationships 💲 Lower development costs What was your latest study ops headache? Tell us about it below! 👇

If your new trial tech innovation is gathering dust while you're struggling to get team buy-in, stop scrolling! We've got a new game plan for you, courtesy of leaders from Biogen, Tris Pharma, and KORIO. At our CORE Symposium, we explored the good, the bad, and the ugly of change management with Jenn Curry, Liza C. Micioni, CCRA, ACRP-PM, and Ryan Keane. Now, we've compiled a playbook to successfully guide sponsors through change management. In the article, you'll find rock-solid advice on: ✅ Selling your vision ✅ Rallying team support for the change ✅ Engaging stakeholders meaningfully ✅ Ensuring successful adoption on the front lines See the full post in the comments! 👇 What's the toughest change management hurdle you've encountered?

👊 TAKEDOWN! 👊 ProofPilot: 1, Trial Complexity: 0 It may have been all stunt work at the CNS Summit talent show last night, but it's a perfect allegory for what we do to combat the enemies of successful trial conduct: process inefficiencies, disorganized content, communication hurdles, and ineffective training. From the stage to the study site, it all comes down to coordination, precision, and great partnerships. 🙌