Clinical Trial Site Workload & Data Capture Assessment
Measures documentation burden, system usability, and data capture pain points among clinical trial site staff. Designed for site coordinators, investigators, and research personnel to identify operational bottlenecks and prioritize workflow improvements.
샘플 질문
템플릿에 포함된 내용을 미리 확인해 보세요. 모든 질문은 설문 공개 전에 자유롭게 수정할 수 있습니다.
In the past 12 months, have you worked on clinical trials at your site?
- Yes
- No
Outside of clinical trials, approximately how many hours per week did you spend on clinical documentation and data entry in the past 30 days?
- Less than 2 hours
- 2–5 hours
- 6–10 hours
- 11–20 hours
- 21–30 hours
- More than 30 hours
On average, how many hours per week did you spend on trial documentation and data entry in the past 30 days?
- Less than 2 hours
- 2–5 hours
- 6–10 hours
- 11–20 hours
- 21–30 hours
- More than 30 hours
Which tools did you use for trial data capture in the past 30 days? Select all that apply.
- Sponsor-specific EDC
- eSource platform
- EHR-to-EDC integration
- Paper source
- Spreadsheets (e.g., Excel)
- Other (please specify)
Please rank your top 3 biggest trial data capture pain points (1 = biggest).
- Protocol complexity impacting data entry
- Duplicate entry between source and EDC
- System performance/downtime
- High query volume
- Training/retraining requirements
- Scheduling/coordination conflicts
How confident are you that your site can meet sponsor data timelines over the next 3 months?
What type of site do you primarily work at?
- Academic medical center
- Community hospital
- Private practice
- Independent research site/SMO
- FQHC/Public clinic
- Other (please specify)
Thank you for your time. Your input will directly inform efforts to reduce site burden and improve data capture workflows. Your responses are confidential and will be reported in aggregate only.
What is your primary role in clinical trials at your site?
- Principal Investigator (PI)
- Sub-Investigator
- Study Coordinator/CRC
- Research Nurse
- Data Manager
- Pharmacist
- Other (please specify)
Overall, how burdensome was non-trial clinical documentation in the past 30 days?
Overall, how burdensome was trial data capture at your site in the past 30 days?
Which was your primary system for entering trial data in the past 30 days?
- Sponsor-specific EDC
- eSource platform
- EHR-to-EDC integration
- Paper source
- Spreadsheets (e.g., Excel)
- Other
Which of the following trial activities took the most of your time in the past 30 days? Please rank your top 3 (1 = most time).
- Source documentation
- EDC data entry
- Query management/resolution
- Visit scheduling/coordination
- Regulatory/IRB documentation
- Training/meetings
Based on your responses in this survey, please share any additional thoughts or feelings about site documentation or data capture.
How many years have you worked in clinical research (any role)?
- Less than 1 year
- 1–3 years
- 4–6 years
- 7–10 years
- 11–15 years
- More than 15 years
How many interventional trials did you actively support in the past 30 days?
- 0
- 1–2
- 3–5
- 6–10
- More than 10
Which systems took most of your non-trial documentation time in the past 30 days? Select all that apply.
- EHR
- Quality registry portals
- Prior authorization portals
- Spreadsheets
- Paper forms
- Other (please specify)
Thinking about your primary trial data entry system, how easy or difficult was it to navigate between forms and pages?
What one change would most reduce trial data capture burden at your site?
We'd like to understand your experience with trial documentation and data capture in more depth. An AI moderator will ask a few brief follow-up questions based on your earlier responses.
What patient population do you primarily serve?
- Adults
- Pediatrics
- Both
What was the single biggest barrier to efficient non-trial documentation in the past 30 days?
How easy or difficult was it to enter and save patient data in your primary system?
Which trial phases do you typically support? Select all that apply.
- Phase I
- Phase II
- Phase III
- Phase IV/Post-market
- Medical device studies
- Other (please specify)
How easy or difficult was it to manage and resolve queries in your primary system?
In which region do you primarily work?
- North America
- Western Europe
- Eastern Europe
- Latin America
- Asia-Pacific
- Middle East & Africa
- Other
How easy or difficult was it to generate reports or export data from your primary system?
Overall, how satisfied are you with your primary system for trial data entry?
포함된 기능
AI 후속 질문
정형화된 설문이 놓치는 세부 내용을, 주관식 답변에 맞춰 AI가 심층 질문으로 끌어냅니다.
주의력 확인 장치
성의 없는 답변과 저품질 응답자를 걸러내는 내장 안전장치입니다.
AI가 작성한 문안
문구, 질문 순서, 분기 로직까지 AI가 연구 목표에 맞춰 작성합니다.
자동 리포트
응답이 모이면 주요 주제, 인용문, 이해하기 쉬운 요약이 자동으로 작성됩니다.
다른 서비스와 비교
다른 설문 도구의 가장 유사한 템플릿을 검토했습니다. 그 도구들이 잘하는 점과, 이 템플릿이 한발 더 나아가는 지점을 정리했습니다.
이 템플릿을 선택하는 이유
- Includes an AI follow-up interview block that lets site staff elaborate in their own words on documentation and data-capture pain points, going beyond fixed-choice questions
- Combines burden ratings (opinion scales), tool/system usage questions, and ranking questions to pinpoint which specific systems and activities create the most workload
- Captures role, trial phase, region, and experience context so results can be segmented by coordinator vs. investigator vs. site type
- Asks directly about confidence in meeting sponsor data timelines, giving a forward-looking operational risk signal that a generic form does not capture
Typeform
Data Capture Form TemplateThis is a generic data capture form template, not a clinical trial or research-specific survey, and it appears to be a static form rather than a fielding-ready assessment with branching or scoring logic. It could be manually adapted for research use but includes none of the clinical-trial-specific content (system usability, query resolution, timeline confidence) found in QuestionPunk's template.
잘하는 점
- Clean, simple UI for basic data collection
- Easy to customize field types for general-purpose intake
- Part of a well-known no-code form builder ecosystem
아쉬운 점
- No adaptive AI follow-up interviewing to probe open-ended pain points
- Not tailored to clinical trial workflows, roles, or terminology
- No built-in per-response quality scoring or automated operational report generation
설문을 공개할 준비가 되셨나요?
이 템플릿을 편집기에서 열어 보세요. 첫 응답자가 보기 전에 모든 부분을 원하는 대로 바꿀 수 있습니다.
관련 템플릿
같은 카테고리의 다른 설문을 만나 보세요.
Post-Visit Patient Support & Education Experience Survey
Measures patient perceptions of post-visit support access, health education clarity, and care coordination quality. Designed for healthcare organizations seeking to identify gaps in patient communication and follow-up processes.
템플릿 보기Patient-Provider Fit & Care Preference Assessment
Measures patient-provider alignment across clinical, communication, and access dimensions to identify mismatch drivers and care preferences. Designed for healthcare organizations, insurers, or researchers seeking to improve provider matching and patient retention.
템플릿 보기LIS 사용성 및 데이터 무결성 평가
바이오테크 및 헬스케어 분야 실험실 전문가를 대상으로 최근 30~90일간의 경험을 바탕으로 실험실 정보 시스템의 사용성, 데이터 정확성, 워크플로 효율성을 평가합니다.
템플릿 보기환자 예약 및 알림 만족도 조사
진료 예약, 확정, 알림 과정에 대한 환자의 만족도를 평가하여 불편 요소를 파악하고, 커뮤니케이션 시점을 최적화하며, 예약 부도(노쇼) 비율을 낮추기 위한 조사입니다.
템플릿 보기Group Therapy Informed Consent & Readiness Check
Confirms that a new group therapy member understands confidentiality limits, voluntary participation, and what to expect, while gauging comfort with sharing in front of others. An AI follow-up interview surfaces the specific worries behind low comfort or confusion so facilitators can address them before the first session. Built for therapists and group practices running intake.
템플릿 보기Hospital Discharge Experience & Readiness Survey
Assesses whether patients left the hospital genuinely prepared to manage recovery at home — covering instruction clarity, medication confidence, and follow-up care arrangements. An AI follow-up interview digs into what actually happened after discharge, especially for patients who needed unplanned care, to surface where the handoff broke down.
템플릿 보기