A Mission to Expand Recruitment Territory

Q: How did Citeline evaluate which countries were underperforming?

Citeline used Trialtrove+ to benchmark enrollment performance by country and assess metrics such as study activity, retention, and screen failure, comparing sponsor-selected countries against enrollment means and activation timelines.

Citeline found most of the sponsor-chosen countries performed ~70% below the enrollment mean. See what other areas for improvement Citeline revealed.

key findings

Challenge: 70% average enrollment lag identified
Opportunity: 5x higher enrollment potential uncovered
Action: 122 recommended investigators shortlisted

First Name

Last Name

Company

Job Title

Email address

Business phone

How Can We Help

Please check this box to receive communications from Citeline about products, services and content you may find of interest. サイトラインの業界・市場レポートやイベント等最新ニュースを受け取る（無料）

FAQ

What challenge was the CRO trying to solve in this clinical trial?

The CRO was bidding on a rescue program for an enrollment-challenged study and needed to understand what was driving recruitment obstacles in the current mix of sponsor-selected countries.

How did Citeline evaluate which countries were underperforming?

Citeline used Trialtrove⁺ to benchmark enrollment performance by country and assess metrics such as study activity, retention, and screen failure, comparing sponsor-selected countries against enrollment means and activation timelines.

What was the outcome of the recommendations?

Scenario modeling converged on Eastern EU countries with about 6x more enrollment velocity and a 20% higher average performance score. With these insights, the CRO won the rescue program and is using the findings to inform its post-rescue mitigation plan.