The people behind the data: CRC and CRA feedback on cubeCDMS

Clinical research success depends not only on powerful technology but also on the people who use it every day. That’s why we take the feedback of Clinical Research Coordinators (CRCs) and Clinical Research Associates (CRAs) to heart. Their insights help us ensure that cubeCDMS, our electronic data capture (EDC) system, delivers on its promise: making data entry and review as efficient and seamless as possible.

We recently surveyed nearly 500 users who work in those critical roles, asking them to rate cubeCDMS and to share their feedback with us.

Why CRCs and CRAs matter

They are the backbone of clinical research. CRCs are on the front lines of data capture, entering critical patient information into the system while balancing the demands of patient care. CRAs play a crucial role in reviewing the data to maintain accuracy, integrity, and compliance. While these professionals may not directly influence which EDC platform is selected for a study, their work is profoundly shaped by it.

At CRScube, we believe that supporting CRCs and CRAs is essential – not only because they safeguard data quality, but because making their daily work easier gives them more time to focus on what matters most: patients. 

What our users value most

There are clear insights that surface from the comments shared by the respondents. Both CRCs and CRAs consistently point to ease of use and the intuitive design of cubeCDMS as standout strengths. For CRCs, the flexibility of the EDC, which adapts smoothly to their workflows, ensures that data entry fits into their day rather than disrupting it. Many CRCs also highlight the task list feature as a practical tool that directs them straight to what needs attention, saving valuable time. CRAs, on the other hand, emphasize how straightforward it is to access and extract data, which simplifies monitoring and reduces time spent navigating the system.

Interestingly, our data also shows that users who have worked with other EDC platforms rate cubeCDMS even higher than those who have only experienced CRScube. This comparison underscores how well cubeCDMS stands up against other solutions in the market, reinforcing our belief that intuitive design and workflow adaptability are powerful differentiators.

One of our users noted: “As a CRA, I can easily track query resolution, monitor data entry status, and ensure data quality in real time. The system’s interface is clean and well-organized, which helps minimize errors and saves valuable time. Most importantly, investigators and coordinators consistently tell me that it's the easiest EDC system they've ever used, which reduces their burden and encourages timely data entry.” 

Why Net Promoter Score matters

To measure how well cubeCDMS serves the needs of its users, we regularly evaluate Net Promoter Scores (NPS). NPS is a simple yet powerful measure of user satisfaction, calculated by asking participants how likely they are to recommend a product on a scale of 0–10. Responses are grouped into three categories: Promoters (9–10), Passives (7–8), and Detractors (0–6). The percentage of Detractors is then subtracted from the percentage of Promoters, producing a score between –100 and +100.

While NPS is widely used in SaaS, it’s worth noting that benchmarks vary significantly by industry. Retail and hospitality companies, for instance, often see higher averages due to frequent consumer interactions, while industries such as telecom or utilities typically score lower. 

What the numbers tell us

For SaaS solutions, the average NPS hovers around 35–40, with scores above 50 considered excellent. By this measure, cubeCDMS’s combined NPS of 50.7 is not only strong, but a clear indicator that our system is outperforming the average SaaS benchmark. Out of 477 respondents, 90.4% were either Passive or Promoters, reflecting broad appreciation for the system and its role in their work. We are delighted with this feedback from our users, affirming that the platform provides value not only in clinical research settings but also by global standards of software experience. 

Areas for improvement

Just as importantly as sharing what they value most, CRCs and CRAs have also pointed out areas where cubeCDMS can continue to improve. Much of their feedback centres on data oversight and system navigation. For example, some users would like clearer visibility of changes when preparing follow-up reports for SAEs, the ability to check SDV status at a glance, and more flexibility in how they move through fields, such as using the tab key. Another interesting point raised relates to medication term entry: while some users prefer entering terms in their native language, others prefer English, reflecting the diverse global community of researchers.

We see this type of feedback as vital to guiding our roadmap. In many cases, we are already planning enhancements to better support these requests. At the same time, some suggestions touch on areas where regulatory compliance requirements set boundaries that limit how much we can adapt. Balancing usability with strict compliance standards is part of our responsibility as an eClinical solutions provider. While not every use case can be accommodated, our commitment remains the same: to make cubeCDMS as intuitive and supportive as possible within the framework of regulatory obligations. 

Looking Ahead

The NPS results are more than just numbers; they are a reflection of our mission. We are committed to making clinical trials more accessible through intuitive, reliable, and efficient technology. Listening closely to CRCs and CRAs is not just an exercise in feedback; it is a way to stay close to the research itself. We will continue to enhance cubeCDMS, guided by the voices of those who use it every day, because staying connected to the heart of clinical research is what keeps us focused on a healthier future together.