What do clinical trial sites and CRAs look for in the best EDC systems?

Insights from 477 Clinical Research Coordinators and Monitors on the EDC Platforms They Prefer

When organizations evaluate the best electronic data capture (EDC) systems for clinical trials, decision-makers often focus on features, integrations, or compliance. But an equally important perspective comes from the people who use these systems every day: Clinical Research Coordinators (CRCs) and Clinical Research Associates (CRAs).

These professionals are responsible for entering, reviewing, and monitoring clinical trial data. Their experience with an EDC platform can directly affect data quality, site efficiency, and trial timelines.

To better understand what users prefer in an EDC system, we surveyed 477 CRCs and CRAs who actively use cubeCDMS, our clinical data management system. Their feedback highlights what matters most when evaluating modern EDC solutions.

What makes an EDC system easy for sites and monitors to use?

Based on user feedback, the most valued characteristics of a high-performing EDC platform include:

1. Ease of Use

CRCs consistently emphasize that the best EDC systems are simple and intuitive. Since coordinators are responsible for entering large volumes of patient data, complicated workflows can slow down trials and increase errors.

Users reported that intuitive navigation and clean interface design significantly improve their daily workflow.

2. Workflow Flexibility

CRCs noted that an effective EDC platform should adapt to site workflows, rather than forcing users to change how they work.

Features such as task lists and clear data entry guidance help coordinators quickly identify what needs attention, reducing time spent searching through the system.

3. Efficient Data Review for CRAs

For CRAs, the priority is fast data access and monitoring efficiency. Users highlighted how easy data visibility and extraction simplify:

• Source data verification (SDV)

• Query management

• Monitoring progress across sites

This helps monitors review data more efficiently and maintain trial quality.

One CRA explained the impact clearly:

“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 minimizes errors and saves time. Investigators and coordinators consistently say it’s the easiest EDC system they’ve used.”

How is EDC systems user satisfaction measured?

To measure user satisfaction, we track Net Promoter Score (NPS) among CRCs and CRAs using cubeCDMS.

NPS is a widely used SaaS metric that asks users how likely they are to recommend a product on a scale from 0 to 10:

• Promoters: 9–10

• Passives: 7–8

• Detractors: 0–6

The score is calculated by subtracting the percentage of detractors from promoters, resulting in a score between –100 and +100.

How does cubeCDMS compare to other SaaS platforms?

Across nearly 500 clinical research professionals, cubeCDMS achieved a NPS of 50.7. For context, a score above 50 for SaaS products is considered excellent.

With 90.4% of respondents rating the platform as Promoters or Passives, the results suggest strong user satisfaction compared with typical enterprise software benchmarks.

Interestingly, respondents who had previously worked with other EDC systems rated cubeCDMS even higher than those who had only used one platform. This indicates that users with broader industry experience often find the system easier to use than alternatives.

Why CRC and CRA feedback matters when choosing an EDC

CRCs and CRAs rarely make the final purchasing decision for an EDC system. However, they are the professionals who:

• Enter patient data

• Review and verify trial records

• Manage queries

• Maintain regulatory data quality

If the system is difficult to use, it can create site burden, slower data entry, and monitoring inefficiencies.

For this reason, many sponsors now consider site usability and monitor efficiency when evaluating the best EDC platforms. An EDC that supports CRCs and CRAs ultimately helps research teams focus on what matters most: patients and data quality.

What improvements do users still want from EDC platforms?

Even with strong user satisfaction, survey participants highlighted areas where modern EDC systems could improve.

Common suggestions included:

• Clearer visibility of data changes for follow-up reports

• Easier access to SDV status

• Faster navigation between fields (such as tab navigation)

• Greater flexibility for medication term entry across languages

Some of these improvements are already being explored, while others require careful consideration due to regulatory compliance requirements that govern clinical trial systems.

Balancing usability with regulatory standards remains a key responsibility for any eClinical technology provider.

The role of user feedback in building better EDC systems

When organizations evaluate the best EDC software for clinical trials, technical capabilities are only part of the equation. The real test is how well the platform supports the people responsible for managing trial data every day.

Listening to CRCs and CRAs helps ensure that EDC systems:

• Reduce administrative burden

• Improve data quality

• Accelerate clinical trial execution

At CRScube, ongoing feedback from users directly informs how cubeCDMS evolves, ensuring the platform remains intuitive, efficient, and aligned with the needs of modern clinical research teams.