Advarra OnCore vs. Medrio

Advarra is well suited for monitoring the progress of the clinical trials for a research organization. It's biggest advantage is the fact that the participants details and accrual monitoring shows the progress of the clinical trial. OnCore provides the capability of creating and using study calendars and especially monitoring and tracking participants visits. OnCore may be less appropriate to use in regards to grants and funds tracking.

Incentivized

Medrio is very user friendly and even allows the user to print out the eCRFs to be used as source documents. This makes creating source documents very easy for the Research team and the information directly matches the EDC, which makes the monitoring process go much smoother. The process for withdrawing a subject can be a bit confusing, as the system only allows for a "screen-failure" designation and not an option for withdrawal, or is lost to follow-up.

Incentivized

• Ease of navigation for entering subject data.
• Very organized placement of eCRFs.
• Allows for accurate and efficient data collection.

Incentivized

• The system does not allow a separate designation for screen failures that were lost to follow-up or who were withdrawn by the PI.
• When a subject is deemed a screen-failure, eCRFs are still expected to be filled out and it is unclear which ones unless otherwise directed by the in-house team.

Incentivized

I have not had any technical issues with this product in the two years I've used it, which speaks for itself. I like how I am now able to use my email address to sign in instead of remembering yet another user name, this makes using this EDC a much more enjoyable experience.

Incentivized

I have not used nor evaluated any other products similar to Advarra OnCore. Did not participate in the selection process.

Incentivized

• Monitoring visits run much smoother due to the fact that eCRFs can be directly printed from the EDC.
• Information requested in the EDC is clear and concise and easy to understand.

Incentivized