Potential match
Synthetic profile 01
Fabricated example · no patient data
SYN-TRIAL-01 · Metabolic health studyCurrent synthetic snapshot
Criteria and evidence
For research sites and study teams
Find trial candidates in hospital data.
Emtrial matches inclusion and exclusion criteria against approved clinical data sources. The study team receives a prioritized list for pre-screening and reviews every potential match.
How it works
From protocol criteria to patients for pre-screening.
Emtrial brings the protocol criteria, approved clinical data, and supporting source information into one workflow for the study team.
Study protocol
Reviewed eligibility criteria
Match against clinical data
Potential matches for pre-screening
Study-team review
Example view
A potential match, with every criterion linked to its source.
This fabricated view shows which criteria the available clinical information supports and where information is missing. It does not depict a real patient or system run.
Ready for study-team review
Study criterion
Age between 40 and 70 years.Synthetic protocol · inclusion criterion
Local evidence
Synthetic age value: 58 years.Synthetic profile extract · current snapshot
Criterion supported
Assessment
The available synthetic value supports this criterion.
Study criterion
HbA1c ≥ 7.5% within the previous 90 days.Synthetic protocol · inclusion criterion
Local evidence
HbA1c 8.1% · laboratory result dated 12 August 2026.Synthetic laboratory source · current snapshot
Criterion supported
Assessment
The value and date in the synthetic source support this criterion.
Study criterion
Exclusion if eGFR is below 45 mL/min/1.73m².Synthetic protocol · exclusion criterion
Local evidence
No sufficiently recent synthetic laboratory value in the review period.Synthetic laboratory source checked · evidence missing
Information required
Assessment
The exclusion is neither supported nor ruled out. The study team follows up.
This is a pre-screening result, not an eligibility decision. The study team reviews every potential match.
Clinical data access
Connect the data sources your study team already uses.
Emtrial works with approved clinical data sources, including EHR data, laboratory systems, and clinical documents. Patient-level data and matching results remain within hospital-controlled systems.
Trust boundary
Patient-level data stays inside the hospital.
The local study team reviews potential matches. Sponsors and CROs receive only aggregate information approved by the research site.
Stays inside the hospital
- ✓Patient records from approved clinical sources
- ✓Individual matching results
- ✓Supporting information and study-team decisions
May leave after hospital approval
- →Site-approved cohort information
- →Open questions and assessment scope
- →No patient records or individual matching results
Only aggregate information approved by the research site crosses this boundary.
The study-team workload
The opportunity is there.
Finding it takes time.
Published studies point to three operational bottlenecks: incomplete structured data, candidates missed by manual recruitment, and limited staff capacity. 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 prescreening
Beyond manual search
+14%Source 2Köpcke et al., International Journal of Medical Informatics (2013) · one German study siteAt the Erlangen site of a European multicenter study, an electronic report supported the inclusion of 42 additional patients, reported by the authors as 14%. This is not an expected product effect.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-center, 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