News & Publications

September 3, 2026 – The Society for Clinical Research Sites (SCRS) today announced the finalists for the 2026 Eagle Award, the clinical research industry’s leading tool for evaluating and […]

The organizations that benefit most from AI won’t be the ones with the newest platforms or biggest tech budgets. They’ll be the ones who already did the hard work of connecting research to healthcare and building real trust with patients and communities.

Read on to see why the future of AI in clinical research depends less on the tools and more on the foundation you build before you use them.

That gap between “documented” and “prepared” isn’t a training failure. It’s an operational one, and it’s costing sponsors time, compliance, and site goodwill. This whitepaper breaks down why the training model most sponsors rely on can’t meet what ICH E6(R3) now expects, why legacy LMS platforms and CRO-delivered training can’t close the gap, and what a sponsor-owned approach looks like when it works. Read on for proof points from sponsors who’ve already made the switch.

More complexity. Same expectations. Less time for patients. That’s the reality facing research sites today, and it was front and center at SCRS West. This article breaks down what site leaders had to say about capacity, patient support, and what real operational relief actually looks like.

The sites that recruit best aren’t necessarily the ones with the biggest database or budget. They’re the ones that turn people, processes, and partnerships into a single working system. This article breaks down how to build that system, from cross-functional collaboration to long-term physician partnerships to using data without needing fancy tech. Learn how your site can turn independence into your biggest recruitment advantage.

Participants call the site when payments, travel, or support requests stall, even when another provider owns the answer. This article examines why vendor handoffs so often return to coordinators, what a usable handoff needs to transfer, and what sites should ask before enrollment begins.

Sites are not facing a single AI governance challenge. They’re facing two simultaneously — and they have almost no infrastructure for either. 

On one side, sponsors and CROs are pushing AI tool adoption at an accelerating pace, often without providing sites the training, validation guidance, or vendor standards needed to use those tools responsibly.

The Society for Clinical Research Sites (SCRS) congratulates David Vulcano on his appointment as CEO of the Association of Clinical Research Professionals (ACRP).  At the invitation of SCRS Founder Christine Pierre, David joined the SCRS Leadership Council in 2015 and has served as Honorary President since 2021.

Four organizations share how they’ve meaningfully cut redundant site training burdens through role-based assignments, on-demand guidance, and intuitive design — all without compromising compliance. Their shared takeaway: training should enable performance, not create a paper trail.

Traditional budget models haven’t kept up with the realities of modern trial execution. Sites absorb hidden costs that sponsors don’t account for, leading to adversarial negotiations, delayed startups, and strained resources. Forward-thinking sponsors are changing that with technology fees, contingency funds, and a genuine effort to understand what sites actually need.

Most studies have support resources in place, but sites often don’t know what’s available or how to access it. When support stays invisible, manual workarounds take over and burden shifts back to already-stretched teams. Visible, easy-to-use support benefits sites and participants alike.

Mobile tools add real value for short, time-bound actions like approvals, sign-offs, and safety notifications — but mobility rarely means mobile-only. New efficiency gains come with new governance questions around auditability and accessibility. The biggest wins come when mobile design respects the realities of busy clinical environments.

Dropout rates of 30–40% are common in cardiometabolic trials, yet retention is still treated as a downstream problem rather than a design decision. The real drivers — visit burden, logistics, side effects — are predictable, which means they’re preventable. Until trials are designed around how participants actually live, the enrollment-to-completion gap will persist.

Digital tools are reshaping clinical trials, but they can’t eliminate every barrier patients face. Sites absorb the friction between protocol design and patient reality daily. Making trials truly accessible requires pairing technology with human-centered support.

Study delays, holds, and cancellations increased 105% in 2025 compared to 2024, representing one of the most significant operational challenges facing research sites today. These disruptions […]