Science 37

Provides the components of a decentralized or hybrid trial: patient-facing technology, telemedicine investigators, mobile nursing, and remote coordinators, so enrollment is not limited by proximity to a physical site.

Platform plus services, priced per study and per component.

Whatever the structure, convert it to cost per randomized patient before you compare proposals. Cost per referral is the number vendors prefer to quote and the number that tells you least.

• Removes geography as an enrollment constraint
• Mature DCT technology stack
• Can act as a virtual site alongside your existing network

• Not every protocol can be decentralized; assessment burden decides
• Adds a regulatory and operational workstream sites are not used to

Worth it when: Protocols with remote-friendly assessments and a geographically dispersed population.

Not worth it when: Infusion or imaging-heavy protocols requiring frequent on-site procedures.

• CuravitVirtual CRO focused on digital therapeutics and decentralized designs.
• Lindus HealthAll-in-one CRO bundling recruitment, sites, and eClinical with fixed pricing.
• Elligo Health ResearchBrings trials to community physician practices and their patient records.

• Science 37 vs Curavit — Two decentralized models at different scales.

Ask for the referral-to-randomization ratio on three studies resembling yours, in the same indication and the same countries. If a vendor will not give it, that is the answer. If your enrollment forecast itself is the shaky part, our sister publication Rock Enroll covers forecasting and rescue in depth.