This post is sponsored by IMARC Research, Inc.
Since the August 2011 release of the draft guidance document by the FDA on a risk-based approach to monitoring, there has been a lot of buzz in the industry about how to apply the approach in clinical trials. While many ask the question about how this risk-based approach may reduce the costs of clinical studies by requiring less on-site monitoring of data, it’s also important to ask what the risk is for not going on site.
We’ve addressed this dilemma in IMARC’s newest whitepaper: Centralized vs. Onsite Monitoring: A Sponsor’s Balancing Act Applying a Risk-based Approach.
RCM Outsourcing: Balancing Human Expertise & Smart Technology
Greenway Health blends smart technology with human expertise to elevate revenue cycle.
In theory, a centralized approach to monitoring may reduce short-term costs, and excluding on-site monitoring altogether may prove to have long-term consequences. Centralized and on-site monitoring are not meant to be mutually exclusive; instead, on-site monitoring, combined with an overall centralized review process and excellent communication throughout, results in a high-quality, risk-based approach to identifying and securing compliance that can give sponsors confidence that :
- Patients enrolled in their trials have been protected.
- Their data is accurate.
- Their investigational product can reach the finish line.
Please take time to download IMARC Research’s newest whitepaper. Let us know about your thoughts on this important topic.
This post appears through the MedCity Influencers program. Anyone can publish their perspective on business and innovation in healthcare on MedCity News through MedCity Influencers. Click here to find out how.