Find trial candidates in hospital data faster.

Emtrial matches inclusion and exclusion criteria against approved clinical data sources. The study team receives potential matches for pre-screening and reviews every one of them.

From trial criteria to candidates for pre-screening.

Example with synthetic data, accelerated

Matching against hospital data

Completed

4,000 of 4,000 records100%

Met
42
Information missing
96
Not met
3,862
  1. Candidate 0017 of 7 criteria
    Met
  2. Candidate 0447 of 7 criteria
    Met
  3. Candidate 0276 of 7 criteria
    Information missing
For study-team review

Many records become one list to review.

Every record is given one of three states: met, information missing, or not met. Missing information stays open and never counts as an exclusion.

Doctor working at a computer in a bright clinical office

Connect the sources your team already uses.

Emtrial uses approved EHR data, laboratory results, and clinical documents.

Every suggestion leads to its source.

Review the AI assessment for each criterion. Click a source to see the information behind it.

Example with synthetic data

Criteria review

Study SYN-03 · Candidate 063

Trial criteria

InclusionMet

ECOG performance status of 0 or 1.

ExclusionInformation missing

Active infection requiring systemic treatment.

InclusionNot met

eGFR ≥ 45 mL/min/1.73 m² in two measurements at least 14 days apart.

Sources

Clinical note · Performance status

12 Sep 2026

Follow-up visit: The patient walks daily, manages shopping and light housework independently, and continues office work. Jogging and heavy gardening are no longer possible due to rapid fatigue.

AI note

Inferred from the described activity level: ECOG 1. The study team needs to confirm this assessment.

Your team reviews the information and decides.0 of 3 reviewed

The opportunity is there.
Finding it takes time.

Three bottlenecks from published studies. The figures describe the cited settings and are not Emtrial performance claims.

Structured EHR data

35%Source 1Köpcke et al., BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making (2013) · five German university hospitals15 trials and 706 patient characteristics. The 35% measure combines the availability of structured EHR fields with their population across patient records; it is not an eligibility rate.Open source

overall completeness for recruitment pre-screening

Beyond manual search

+14%Source 2Köpcke et al., International Journal of Medical Informatics (2013) · one German study siteAt the Erlangen site of a European multicentre study, an electronic report supported the inclusion of 42 additional patients, reported by the authors as 14%. The figure is not a forecast for Emtrial.Open source

additional patients included after an electronic recruitment report

Staffing constraints

74%Source 3Straube et al., Frontiers in Oncology (2017) · one German university hospitalThe abstract reports 31 of 42 complete responses (74%); the results section instead reports 31 of 44 (70%). Single-centre, self-reported survey; not a German average.Open source

of respondents cited limited human resources as a recruitment barrier

Sources and method: Köpcke et al., BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making (2013) · five German university hospitals Köpcke et al., International Journal of Medical Informatics (2013) · one German study site Straube et al., Frontiers in Oncology (2017) · one German university hospital

Patient-level data stays inside the hospital.

The local study team reviews potential matches. Sponsors and CROs receive only aggregate information approved by the hospital.

Hospital-controlled environment

Example with synthetic data

Release response

Study SYN-03

Will be shared

Potential candidates
42
Records matched
4,000
Open questions
1

Stays inside the hospital

  • Patient records from approved clinical sources
  • Individual matching results
  • Supporting information and study-team decisions
The research site decides what is shared

Limited external view

Example with synthetic data

Research site 01

Released

May leave after hospital approval

Potential candidates
42
Records matched
4,000
Open questions
1

No patient records or individual matching results

Only aggregate, released information

Security and data protection.

We agree the specific measures with your IT and data protection teams.

  • Where it runs

    In your environment

    Designed to run in the hospital-controlled environment. Matching and its results stay in your hospital’s systems.

  • GDPR

    Only for matching

    Designed around GDPR purpose limitation and data minimisation: data is used only to match against a study, and your hospital decides which sources Emtrial draws on.

  • Access

    Access by role

    Designed for role-based access: only authorised members of the study team see potential matches and their sources.

  • Audit logs

    Traceable access

    Designed for audit logs that record who viewed which data and what was reviewed or released.

Short answers.

Question not listed?Write to us

Which data sources does Emtrial work with?

With clinical data sources that your institution approves. These include EHR data, laboratory systems, and clinical documents such as clinical notes and reports.

Does Emtrial replace pre-screening by the study team?

No. Emtrial searches the approved data and brings together the information for every criterion. Your study team reviews every potential match and decides on the next steps.

How do we see what a suggestion is based on?

Every assessment of a criterion points to its source, for example a clinical note or a dated laboratory value. One click shows the underlying information.

What happens when information is missing?

Missing information is marked as open and is not treated as exclusion. Your team sees what is missing and can follow up on exactly that point.

Where is patient data processed?

In the hospital-controlled environment. Patient-level data and matching results remain within your hospital’s controlled systems. Emtrial is designed for role-based access and traceable logs.

How do we get started?

With a conversation about your current search, the available data sources, and your requirements. IT, data protection, and the study team should be involved early. One possible start is a limited pilot with a single trial.