Referral Center Intelligence
Mapping where eligible patients are lost between diagnosis and your trial.
Clinical trials that struggle to enroll usually don’t have a site problem. They have a patient flow problem.
In most therapeutic areas, especially oncology and rare disease, the physician who diagnoses a patient is not the physician who treats them. The treating physician’s default move is to start standard-of-care therapy — and one dose of SOC often disqualifies that patient from your trial permanently. The diagnosing physician has no idea your trial exists and no way to refer the patient into it.
That gap, typically 48 to 72 hours between diagnosis and treatment, is where eligible patients disappear.
vs. claims data: Claims data is 6–18 months old by the time it reaches a sponsor and shows where patients were treated. Our signals run 30–90 days and show where patients and caregivers are researching right now — which reveals the diagnosing physician’s catchment before treatment starts.
vs. CRO recruitment: A CRO optimizes what happens at the site: activation, coordinator training, media. That’s valuable, but it can’t see patients who never reach the site. We map the pipeline upstream of the site, specifically to find patients lost in the referral gap. The two approaches are complementary, not competing — a CRO’s site-level work is only as good as the patient flow feeding it.
vs. “we tried patient analytics before”: That usually means claims data, EHR extracts, or a dashboard: stale, non-actionable, and disconnected from what to do next. What we deliver is an operational playbook — specific facilities, specific physicians, specific next actions, not a map of where patients might be.
We track real-time research signals: search behavior, forum engagement, patient advocacy network activity. When someone is diagnosed, there’s a measurable, timed spike in research activity from the patient and their caregivers. We call this the curiosity window, and its timing is consistent enough to build an activation plan around, validated across multiple therapeutic areas.
We don’t tap into EMRs. EMR data sits behind institutional firewalls and requires data-sharing agreements that add months to any engagement. Behavioral signals are faster to work with and, because they aren’t tied to a specific health system, they also capture patients at community practices and patients who haven’t yet entered the specialist system at all — the ones EMR-based analytics miss entirely.
→ How our patient intelligence works, in full
4 weeks for a single-geography engagement. Multi-geography and global scopes extend from there depending on complexity. This is a report, not a vendor relationship: you receive it, you act on it, and there’s no ongoing management overhead.
See a sample report excerpt or book a call to walk through what we’re seeing for a trial like yours.
