Site growth

How research sites get more studies from sponsors and CROs

By TrialNotice · Updated
Research site director presenting enrollment results to sponsor representatives across a conference table
Short answerSponsors and CROs award more studies to sites that enroll reliably, start quickly, and give honest feasibility estimates. New relationships face a slower path: Tufts CSDD found 28% of engaged sites are new to the sponsor, and they take 9.9 weeks longer to start than familiar sites. Sites win repeat work by proving patient access with data, not promises.

Why is finding studies so hard for sites?

Finding study opportunities ranks as the second most important improvement area for sites, behind only recruitment, at 49% in SCRS's survey (SCRS). In the Duke and FDA investigator survey, almost half of investigators who stopped after one trial said they wanted to do more but lacked the opportunity (DaVita Clinical Research). Opportunity follows performance, and performance starts with the first study.

How has site selection changed?

Site selection used to run mostly on relationships and site supplied estimates. Today, sponsors build shortlists using epidemiology, geography, and historical enrollment data, then send feasibility questionnaires. Shared data platforms let sponsors compare site level performance, including open dates, first and last patient enrolled, and number of patients enrolled, and some sponsors now use machine learning to rank sites by expected recruitment (PLOS One).

That shift cuts both ways. A site with a strong record becomes visible to more sponsors. A site with a weak record, or none, gets filtered out before anyone reads its feasibility answers.

What do sponsors look for?

  • Enrollment against target. Only 52% of sites meet or exceed targets in a typical trial (Tufts CSDD).
  • Startup speed. Familiar sites finish site initiation 9.9 weeks faster (Tufts CSDD).
  • Forecast accuracy. Sponsors routinely discount site projections, and Getz reports that even adjusted feasibility estimates are accurate less than 10% of the time by sponsor accounts (Applied Clinical Trials). A site whose estimates hold up stands out.
  • Data quality and communication throughout the study.

What can a site do to win more studies?

  1. Build patient access before bidding. A documented referral network behind your numbers turns a claim into evidence.
  2. Answer feasibility honestly. See how to answer a feasibility questionnaire.
  3. Overdeliver on the first study. The first study with a sponsor decides whether there is a second.
  4. Report proactively. Share funnel data with the CRA before they ask.
  5. Specialize. Sponsors remember sites that consistently fill studies in a specific therapeutic area.

Related: how sponsors and CROs select sites.

Get your study in front of the right local physicians

TrialNotice builds a physician referral pipeline around one active study. We identify relevant local physicians within driving distance of your site, send study aligned direct mail, follow up by email and LinkedIn, track engagement with recipient level QR codes, and route warm responses into your site team's workflow.

Talk to TrialNotice

Sources

  1. Tufts CSDD, first comprehensive clinical site initiation benchmark (2018), via GlobeNewswire
  2. "Enhancing site selection strategies in clinical trial recruitment using real world data modeling," PLOS One
  3. Getz K., "Is Investigative Site Feasibility Feasible?" Applied Clinical Trials
  4. DaVita Clinical Research, summary of the Duke and FDA investigator survey (Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications, 2017)
  5. Tufts CSDD, patient recruitment and retention practices study (Jan 2013), via Fierce Biotech
  6. Society for Clinical Research Sites, 2022 Site Landscape Survey White Paper

Keep reading

Two clinical research site staff members reviewing a growth plan together in a bright office
Site growth

How to grow a clinical research site: a practical playbook

Research sites grow by building a record sponsors can verify: enrollment, startup speed, and screen failure. Here is what the data says about site growth, why sponsors reuse sites, and a six step playbook.

 Sponsor clinical operations team reviewing site maps and performance charts on a large screen
Site growth

How sponsors and CROs select clinical trial sites

Sponsors shortlist sites with historical data and epidemiology, send feasibility questionnaires, then choose on patient access, past enrollment, and startup speed. Here is the process, how it evolved, and what it means for sites.

 Clinical research coordinator filling out a feasibility questionnaire on a laptop with a patient database report beside her
Site growth

How to answer a feasibility questionnaire and win the study

Sponsors discount feasibility estimates because most are wrong. Here is how to build an enrollment estimate you can defend, document your patient access, and ask the questions that protect your site.