Trialfacts

Recruits primarily through digital channels for academic, investigator-initiated, and smaller commercial studies, and is unusual in offering a recruitment guarantee structure rather than a pure fee-for-effort arrangement.

Guarantee-linked pricing: fees tied to delivering an agreed number of qualified participants. Read the qualification definition in the contract carefully.

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.

• Risk-sharing commercial model is rare in this market
• Works at study sizes most large vendors decline
• Transparent about what they will and will not take on

• Guarantee attaches to a contract definition of 'qualified', not to randomizations
• Not built for large global Phase III programs

Worth it when: Academic groups, small biotechs, and single-site or few-site studies.

Not worth it when: Multi-country registrational programs with hundreds of sites.

• AutoCruitmentDirect-to-patient digital recruitment with a proprietary pre-screener.
• AntidoteMatches patients through a network of health advocacy and publisher partners.
• CuravitVirtual CRO focused on digital therapeutics and decentralized designs.

• Trialfacts vs AutoCruitment — Guarantee-backed small studies versus scaled campaigns.

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.