Compare OnCore CTMS and Rave CTMS 
- Users report that Rave CTMS excels in ease of use with a score of 8.1, making it more user-friendly for new users compared to OnCore CTMS, which has a lower score of 7.4. Reviewers mention that the intuitive interface of Rave CTMS significantly reduces the learning curve.
- Reviewers mention that OnCore CTMS shines in quality of support, achieving a score of 9.2, while Rave CTMS has a lower score of 8.0. Users on G2 highlight the responsiveness and helpfulness of OnCore's support team, which is crucial for troubleshooting during critical project phases.
- G2 users report that Rave CTMS has a more streamlined participant management feature, allowing for better tracking and engagement of study participants. In contrast, users mention that OnCore CTMS lacks some advanced functionalities in this area, which can lead to inefficiencies.
- Users say that Rave CTMS offers superior operational performance with its robust project management tools, scoring higher in documentation and reporting capabilities. Reviewers highlight features like automated reporting that save time and enhance accuracy, which OnCore CTMS struggles to match.
- Reviewers mention that OnCore CTMS has a better product direction with a positive score of 8.3, indicating a strong roadmap for future enhancements. In comparison, Rave CTMS has a lower score of 6.1, leading some users to express concerns about its long-term viability and feature updates.
- Users on G2 report that Rave CTMS is particularly effective in data centralization, allowing for seamless integration of various data sources. In contrast, OnCore CTMS is noted for having challenges in this area, which can complicate data management for users.
Oncore helps to streamline workflows and centralize reporting of most research activities at our center. Will be perfect when we have universal adoption at our center
The system can be a little clunky to maneuver around in if you are not a daily user or steeped in the ins and outs of OnCore. Custom reporting has become more challenging with changes to data reporting views that have come along with new integrations and...
Very easy to use. Layout is very user friendly
Medidata’s auto-queries are often easy to trigger and hard to fix. The visual design of the interface is a sea of white, and data entry can be difficult to do accurately because of this.
Oncore helps to streamline workflows and centralize reporting of most research activities at our center. Will be perfect when we have universal adoption at our center
Very easy to use. Layout is very user friendly
The system can be a little clunky to maneuver around in if you are not a daily user or steeped in the ins and outs of OnCore. Custom reporting has become more challenging with changes to data reporting views that have come along with new integrations and...
Medidata’s auto-queries are often easy to trigger and hard to fix. The visual design of the interface is a sea of white, and data entry can be difficult to do accurately because of this.
