You never want to see a clinical trial fail. The consequences are enormous: And yet, many of these failures are preventable. A recent article highlighted a trial with unusually high discontinuation rates, particularly in the placebo group. Analysts were “puzzled.” I wasn’t. If a participant isn’t losing weight and suspects they’re on placebo, they can …
In the clinical research world, it’s easy to assume that participants stay in their lane—only enrolling in studies within the same therapeutic area. The reality is far different. Research subjects often cross over between very different indications, creating hidden risks for trial integrity, data quality, and participant safety. These situations aren’t limited to professional subjects …
Ask any seasoned research site team about the toughest protocol criteria to enforce, and you’ll likely hear the same answer: the 30-day washout rule. This requirement — that a subject must not have participated in another trial within the past 30 days — is simple to state but nearly impossible to verify without the right …
In today’s competitive and complex research environment, professional patients—individuals who enroll in multiple clinical trials either simultaneously or back-to-back—pose one of the greatest threats to data integrity, subject safety, and trial success. These individuals often participate for financial gain or repeated access to investigational therapies, disregarding protocol requirements such as washout periods or exclusion criteria. …
In modern clinical research, competition for eligible subjects is intense, protocols are increasingly complex, and timelines are tighter than ever. Across therapeutic areas, one persistent and costly threat continues to undermine trial integrity: duplicate and professional research subjects. These are individuals who enroll in multiple studies either at the same time or in rapid succession—often …
Preventing professional patients in clinical trials, duplicate research subjects, and dual enrollment in clinical trials isn’t just a Day 1 problem — it’s a long‑term necessity. In clinical research, subject risk is often assumed to be limited to eligibility at screening. But what happens after randomization? What about long-term follow-up, crossover phases, or open-label extensions? …
In the world of clinical trials, research sites occasionally have a strange feeling of déjà vu—”It’s you again?” That familiar face showing up for another screening visit may not just be coincidence. In fact, it’s often a warning sign of a growing issue in clinical research: professional patients and duplicate subjects in clinical research. These …
Studies in clinical research show that duplicate or professional trial participants—individuals enrolling in multiple studies simultaneously—are far more common than many sponsors realize. Rates as high as 10% have been reported in therapeutic areas beyond psychiatry, including dermatology, ophthalmology, respiratory, and others. Each duplicate research subject can skew efficacy, safety, and overall trial integrity. The data: …
Clinical trials are complex, high-stakes endeavors where every detail matters — yet one hidden risk continues to undermine studies across all therapeutic areas: duplicate and professional research subjects. You may believe your internal checks, EDC reviews, or sponsor-specific solutions have you covered. The reality?Most systems only detect duplicate subjects after they’ve already dosed — or …
When a clinical trial misses its primary endpoint, the root cause is rarely just the science — more often, it’s hidden threats to the data itself. One of the most overlooked risks is the presence of duplicate research subjects or professional research subjects who enroll in multiple studies or across multiple sites, undermining results and …
