Merative® Clinical Development (formerly IBM® Clinical Development) is a unified, cloud-based Clinical Data Management System designed to help reduce the cycle time to start, amend, and manage clinical studies — enabling life sciences organizations to deliver therapies and innovations faster to their patients.
N/A
REDCap
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
REDCap is a secure web application designed by Vanderbilt University to build and manage online surveys and databases in a research setting for universities.
While REDCap can be used to collect virtually any type of data in any environment (including compliance with 21 CFR Part 11, FISMA, HIPAA, and GDPR), it is specifically geared to support online and offline data capture for research studies and operations.
N/A
Pricing
Merative Zelta
REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture)
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Merative Zelta
REDCap
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Yes
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
Optional
No setup fee
Additional Details
Subscription - For larger organizations and those who need a predictable budget. Most modules included without incurring additional fees. Eligible for volume discounts.
Pay per use - For organizations that need flexibility without a long term contractual commitment. Transparent a la carte pricing, no minimums. Fees start when trial goes live.
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Merative Zelta
REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture)
Considered Both Products
Merative Zelta
Verified User
Director
Chose Merative Zelta
More flexibility with IBM Clinical Development, less heavy to design and offer[s] strong feature[s]. Rave is a stronger EDC system with a very interesting reporting option and a very good reputation with the users, however very heavy to manipulate from the design side.
ICD is a good tool for companies currently utilizing multiple software platforms to create and monitor clinical trial information. Due to the price, it is best suited for large pharmaceutical manufacturers with active pipelines and high R&D spend. ICD's value is more limited to smaller, more focused companies.
Study build process is relatively easy to learn, and there are many tools within the system to help builders throughout the process.
Outstanding support - both technical / Helpdesk (with system features and capabilities) and project management. Each organization has their own Client Success Manager, and ours is doing an excellent job.
Periodical enhancements based on the users/clients/s feedback.
Training materials are very well prepared and organized.
Customization. I can use HTML to change format but there are also a ton of built in functionality for branching logic, matrix configuration, slider scales, etc.
Security. HIPPA compliance is extremely important for medical research and REDCap ensures our data is safe.
Variety of use. Being able to send both surveys and create forms for internal use makes the use cases numerous.
We cannot have multiple study accesses for a study in the studies supported by IBM clinical. eg. Coder and Data manager.
Though all the study-build related errors are flagged on the study-build page, some errors like incorrect dynamics applied, which eventually affects the subject PDF extraction, reports, etc.
When the study is imported from another IBM studies, certain attributes remain running in the background even if it seems to be disabled.
We are satisfied from our experience with IBM, the close collaboration we have with the ICD team is also something we value. We plan to use ICD for a long time
IBM has many different functionalities as well as modules that can be used depending on what the sponsor wants. I like that they are optional so that when building a study, you can give the sponsor options if they want them or not. Many of the optional models I like to use (Training Tracking for example) as they make tracking Site training so much easier than sending training forms out
It is very interesting to me especially that it meets all my needs. The libraries makes the job even much easier, since you can just make a few adjustments to the appropriate template chosen
ICD's support team is phenomenal. They are quick to answer or indicate that they need to research to provide an answer. There are some things that they cannot do which we can be annoying but we deal with it (visit windows). I have been very happy with the support team.
It was easier to understand the usability of the software [ICD]. For our engineers [it] was easier to migrate our data, and fully set up everything. We found out that comparing other software[s], this one is safe, easy to use, has more functionalities, [and it's] easier to work with team members everywhere making clinical trials more efficient.
SurveyMonkey and Google Forms have similar features for surveys but they lack the form options and user interface. They are also not HIPPA compliant so we are not able to collect any identifying information which is usually an issue in research when we are tracking participants. Many institutional review boards won't even approve a study without a HIPPA compliant data collection service.
REDCap allowed us to house all patient information in one single portal which helped us eliminate the need for paper copies. We moved our whole filing system to an electronic version when we became "live" on REDCap. It is also very convenient and accessible to have all of this data in one location.
A very positive impact is the ability for multiple users to see the same health and wellness information for each specific patient. Instead of constantly having to go back and forth via email, phone, etc. to ask about the patient; we could simply look up their information in REDCap and find all of the answers. It made our business much more efficient and made the patients feel as though we did our research prior to meeting with them.