For sponsors and CROs

Assess patient availability at sites earlier.

Emtrial structures inclusion and exclusion criteria from the study protocol. Research sites assess them against approved clinical data and release an aggregate response for the sponsor or CRO.

Request a demo
Example with synthetic data, accelerated

Feasibility request

Study SYN-03

3 of 5 research sites have released their response

Research sitePotential candidates

Site 01Response released

Criteria
7
Open questions
1
Data sources
3
Only aggregate, released information

Patient-level data stays at the research site.

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

Site-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 at the research site

  • 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 site approval

Potential candidates
42
Records matched
4,000
Open questions
1

No patient records or individual matching results

Only aggregate, released information
Researcher working at a computer in a laboratory

Choose research sites based on better data.

A structured response shows whether the target population appears in the available data, which criteria the data can assess, and where uncertainty remains.

Recruitment pressure

Delays cost money.

Recruitment problems affect timelines, budgets, and planned study duration. These published figures describe the cited trials, not Emtrial performance.

Recruitment

80%Source 1Brøgger-Mikkelsen et al., PLOS ONE (2022)Open source

of trials miss enrolment timelines

Cost

€0.5 – 6.9MSource 2Brøgger-Mikkelsen et al., PLOS ONE (2022)Converted from US$0.6–8M using the ECB reference rate €1 = US$1.1593 on 17 August 2026.Original studyECB exchange rate

estimated loss for each delayed trial day

Duration

10.7 moSource 3Raftery et al., NIHR HTA (2015) · 109 publicly funded UK trial projectsPlanned project duration 39.7 months, actual duration 50.4 months (n = 109). The 10.7-month difference concerns the entire project, not recruitment alone.Open source

average overrun versus planned project duration

Sources and method:

Common questions

Short answers.

Question not listed?Write to us

What information does a sponsor or CRO receive?

Only aggregate information approved by the research site: cohort information, open questions, and the scope of the assessment. Patient records and individual matching results stay at the research site.

Does the response replace site feasibility?

No. It adds a data-supported view of the target population. Staffing, infrastructure, budget, and investigator interest remain part of the standard site-feasibility process.

Is a response a recruitment commitment?

No. It shows whether the target population may be present in the available data. It confirms neither the eligibility of individual patients nor a recruitment figure.

Who controls what is shared?

The research site. It runs the assessment itself and decides which aggregate information goes to the sponsor or CRO.

How are the protocol criteria prepared?

AI turns the inclusion and exclusion criteria into a structured draft and marks ambiguities. The research site reviews the draft before using it.