What Sites Wish Tech Vendors (And Sponsors) Heard At SCDM But Probably Didn't

By Abby Proch, executive editor, Clinical Leader

If only the vendors down in the exhibit hall could’ve been there.

On the second day of SCDM 2025, three site-side speakers held a roundtable discussion on the clinical research coordinator (CRC) experience, specifically as it relates to clinical trial technology. Nearly every notable comment from the site representatives would’ve benefited those likely hawking their next and newest AI-assisted wares on the show floor.

Ichan School of Medicine at Mount Sinai’s Therica Miller, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center’s Renata Pancha, and University of Maryland, Baltimore Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health’s Rebecca Hudson convened to discuss the site perspective that afternoon to a sparse but engaged group, often lamenting the challenges their staff face.

Their main concern? Well, there’s not just one. But a throughline of their commentary was that CRCs are unfairly being tethered to and constrained by the myriad data entry systems that steal their attention from what they love: patient care.

“We can order something and have it tomorrow in our house,” explained Panchal. “And then we’re in this field [of clinical research] that doesn’t match that. And it can be frustrating. I think it can truly bring … job dissatisfaction, because sometimes you just feel stagnant. And it’s just hard. It creates friction.”

She’s referring to how well technology integrates with our personal lives — like ordering an obscure thing from Amazon today to find it on our doorstep the next morning — and how poorly clinical research’s technology performs  — such as the need for duplicate, even triplicate data entry, and logins for five, 10, or more applications. That frustration doesn’t end when a shift is over but permeates the coordinator’s longevity in and satisfaction with their role.

“When you have someone that’s knowledgeable about [the role] and stays with that team, you can just have a more fluid and efficient operation that, again, supports the patient, … the protocols, and the clinical trials,” she said.

Miller agreed with the sponsor-driven tech overload, adding, “We have a number of different systems doing the exact same thing, which brings its own challenges to the end user experience and workflows. It’s like having four or five different email applications or going to the Target checkout line and, each time you go there, the screen is different and you don’t know exactly how to use it. Every time you have to interact with one of those systems in a new way, it takes a little bit of learning and re-learning and a pause moment. So, imagine that magnified throughout your day and across your trials.”

Then she, too, circled back to the impact on coordinators’ job satisfaction, saying, “That can be frustrating, because our coordinators are leaving the clinic. And that’s where their excitement and their gratification streams [from] and the meaning comes. We’re removing the heart of research and some of the technologies [are] overshadowing that human condition and human interaction, which keeps us going every single day.”

The salve seems simple: Make applications and systems that coordinators need to feel supported, they said. Yet, it’s not the reality, because most technologies are vetted and selected by the sponsors, with little or no site input.

For that, Miller advocates for the site partnership model, which involves sponsor-site roundtables and the co-piloting of technologies. “Bringing our know-how, our experiences together would be extremely valuable.”

Until more of that happens, Miller, Panchal, and Hudson are looking for more near-term wins (because the buying cycle for new technology, after all, numbers in the months and years).

Right now, they’re eyeing EHR to EDC data transfer and AI/ML-assisted patient matching. MSK and Mt. Sinai are both streamlining the former and, in doing so, are attempting to make data entry easier for coordinators.

“Our clinical work is happening in the medical record,” said Miller. “There really isn’t a reason to have a human — again, degreed and passionate — sitting in front of a computer, copying and pasting data from here to here, from here to here, all day long.”

“We’re asking coordinators to both be patient-centric — and have those skills necessary to interact well with patients — and also be technology experts,” she added.

Panchal added that small sites with few staff have a lot to gain from technological efficiencies. With fewer data entry obligations, coordinators can devote more time to other duties, particularly with patients.

The panelist also expressed optimism on the role of AI/ML in more quickly and accurately identifying eligible patients for a clinical trial. Miller noted that cancer clinical trials have narrow eligibility criteria, and sites face the daunting task of finding the right patient for the right trial at the right time.

“We’re particularly excited about using large language models to help us narrow our focus and then allow our human capital to really concentrate on patients…. We’re also looking at technology as it relates to real-world data and pragmatic clinical trials. So, what questions can we answer in the real-life setting that give us better information, more representative information, on the patient population?”

Miller and Panchal also aligned on the excitement of patients having better control over their healthcare options.

“The unique thing about matching is [that] it also can be patient empowering. Now, the only way you know about a clinical trial is if your provider decides to tell you about a trial, or you’re super savvy and you try to find something and you bring it to your physician’s office,” said Miller.

With better sponsor and vendor partnerships, all the above could be within reach. The kicker is, they need to be a part of the conversation in the first place.