Top Rated Clinical Research Suite Alternatives
The platform features an intuitive interface, allowing for smooth and pleasant navigation. The menus are well-organized, making it easy to access various sections of the system, whether for data entry or managing clinical trials. Data entry is straightforward and fast, with customizable forms tailored to the specific needs of each study. Additionally, the tool provides real-time tracking of data progress, which is a significant benefit for research teams.
In terms of security and compliance, the platform ensures secure data management and adheres to international standards, such as GDPR in Europe and 21 CFR Part 11 in the United States. This guarantees the confidentiality and integrity of the collected data. The customer support is easily reachable and responsive, offering quick and effective assistance whenever issues or questions arise.
Furthermore, the platform is accessible from multiple devices, including computers, tablets, and smartphones. This flexibility is especially useful for remote work or while traveling, allowing users to stay connected to their data from virtually anywhere. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
while the platform is generally efficient, there are some aspects that could be improved. For one, the learning curve can be a bit steep for new users, especially when dealing with more advanced features. A more detailed beginner's guide would help ease this process.
Another drawback is the limited customization options. While the platform offers some flexibility, it can be frustrating not to fully adjust certain elements of the interface or reports to meet very specific needs. Greater customization would make the platform more adaptable for different users.
Additionally, there can be occasional delays in page loading times, particularly when handling large volumes of data. This can slow down workflows, especially during bulk updates or detailed report generation.
Lastly, the platform’s integration with other software or external databases is somewhat limited. Improved interoperability with other research tools could enhance the overall efficiency and ease of use. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
182 out of 183 Total Reviews for Clinical Research Suite
Overall Review Sentiment for Clinical Research Suite
Log in to view review sentiment.
eTMF software helps me streamline all operations from startup to study closure. The software is highly customizable, so we can set up a separate process for each study type.
We set up the system during onboarding, and with the help of consultants, we implemented it step by step, making it an integrated platform. We started with eTMF and we expanded to CTMS.
What I like about ResearchManager as an organization is that our requests are listened to. They are discussed for possible solutions, and if needed, added to a development list so they can be included in the roadmap. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Like any new software, it took some getting used to, but that’s always the case. I’ve worked with many other systems, and ResearchManager has by far become my favorite, as long as you give it the right attention yourself. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
I like that several people can work together to upload different documents in different sections as in my company several roles are responsible for different documents. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
What I really hate about ResearchManager is that I need to follow up with the site separately through email because sometimes when we complete an action and the site "Approves" a certain stage and the dossier should move to the next stage, the dossier has been sent through to the person who needed to approve or taken action on the next step. (E.g. one of my studies was stuck for 2,5 months until I called with the site and asked them about why it was taking so long. Upon investigation, the dossier had not been sent to the Department Head (whose task it was to Validate as next step. So if they don't get the notification that they need to do something, no one can proceed with the dossier. There's also not a way to see this or follow up on this in the system).
Another thing I really hate in Research Manager is the way it opens up extra questions depending on the response you give.
So you review the questions and start replying but then another (undefined number) of questions could possibly open up depending on the response you give. Which results in you having to go back to the study team or Sponsor to collect more information on the newly opened up questions.
It would be much better if you would be able to see all the questions that need to be answered, so you can collect all the needed information and you can complete all the information/questions in one go once you have everything.
(Site gave me a "pdf print" of all possible questions now as a sort of solution but this is coming from the system and is not very clear.) It would be much better to just open all the questions and grey them out if they don't need to be answered but at least you know everything you need to fill out or check what information you still have to collect.
If you fix those 2 issues, I might like the software a whole lot better already. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
As a clinical research coordinator, I appreciate how user-friendly ResearchManager EDC is. The interface is intuitive, making data entry and monitoring straightforward. It's also great that the platform ensures compliance with the regulatory standards, which is crucial in clinical research. The ability to customize forms and workflows to fit study requirements is a big plus. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
While the system is easy to use, it can be slow when handling large datasets, which can be fustrating during busy study periods. The reporting tools could be more flexible to allow better data analysis. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
It is an easy to use and user friendly platform to initiate and manage your research projects. It helps you in guiding you through the most important information and steps to undertake to take your research to the next step. All together it implements all the important aspects of research with ease. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
One minor thing is that if you submit an amendment or a change in any of the documents, once you click submit, it cannot be undone. Meaning that if you want to change anything afterwards, you either have to wait until the other party has done their job, or you have to contact an administrator to change the status again. Not a big deal, but can be annoying if you make a mistake. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
I find ResearchManager a very good platform for its purpose. It is easy to learn how to use and it is clearly structured, so as to easily find necessary features. For example, I appreciate the feature of being able to refer to specific documents when answering questions from the MREC. I also appreciate the clear instructions and that it refers to relevant pages for additional information. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Some of the features are maybe a bit less clear at first glance (such as the fact that you have to save each page before moving onto the next one, even after uploading and submitting specific documents). I also wish that the section on "questions to the researcher" was visible during the time that a study/amendment is being assessed, although I understand that this might not always be practical. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
The structured approach to managing study information adds to the ease and security of knowing that you are logging all relavant study info. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Finding the application can already be difficult for me, as well as logging in due to being involved with several organisations' Research Manager as part of a multicenter research. It would be a great improvement if I were able to copy (parts of) my study between different organisations' RM, which currently is not a possibility to my knowledge. The differences between different organisations' approach to RM moreover makes it impossible to copy and paste certain information between systems.
The way in which participating centres can be added to the study, is labour intensive.
Options to label research team members' function and function in study were too limited for my specific research.
Moreover, it can be difficult to work with the limited fields in which data is meant to be captured, for instance with relation to inclusion criteria. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
There were clear manuals/instructions available to be able to use ResearchManager efficiently and easily. The steps were not complicated and easy to follow, making the experience smooth. I was able to go back to the website to adjust and add things as needed. The one time I was unsure about something, I contacted customer support and the response was swift and incredibly helpful. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
It was not always clear how long it would take to get feedback. One time the status of the project was changed but there was no date for review available and I had to e-mail customer support. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
The centralized and structured approach to research management is one of ResearchManager’s biggest strengths. It simplifies document management, regulatory compliance, and team collaboration, making it especially valuable for clinical and academic research teams. The ability to track study progress in a clear and organized manner ensures efficiency and reduces administrative burdens. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
The platform's rigidity can be a limitation for users who require more customization to fit their specific workflows. Additionally, the initial learning curve might be challenging for those unfamiliar with research management tools, and more seamless integrations with commonly used research software could enhance its overall utility. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
The eTMF system is used by our company for 1 trial currentlyl, and it has all the desired requirements of an eTMF. Roles can be allocated to users and the users are easy to set up accounts for. The system has a good index for filing which covers all the requirements for a clinical trial. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
The translation into English can be lacking and some terminology and spelling is an issue when transferring it's use to the UK.
We have found the system a little clunky to use at times and unclear where certain documents sit. The language barrier has made customer support challenging when asking questions.
It would benefit from a much larger volume of user guides to avoid email communications needing to be used to resolve issues. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
RM is a comprehensive program, with the basic structure of different tabs always remaining in sight. I appreciate the guidance before entering a new fase (e.g. the need to change the current status, or to inform which person needs to agree in order to finalize submission) and the communication with emails when changes in submission status have taken place. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
The Tab 'Documents primary submission' always looks like a chaotic and complex puzzle, with all the columns of specifiers and the different versions of documents. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
