For sponsors & CROs
See eligibility friction before you launch.
The Protocol Feedback Loop reads your draft criteria the way our matcher reads real patients — and shows you, criterion by criterion, where eligible people fall out.
Protocol Feedback Loop
Eligibility friction, quantified
Every protocol makes trade-offs between scientific precision and recruitability — but most teams discover the recruiting cost after first-patient-in slips. The Protocol Feedback Loop runs your draft criteria against the real recruiting corpus and the population shape we observe, and returns criterion-level findings: which lines do the excluding, what loosening one threshold changes, and where comparable studies drew the line.
Findings arrive with plain-language rationale, and every AI-generated element is labeled and auditable — the same transparency standard patients get.
- Criterion-level findingsThe specific lines that exclude, not a black-box score.
- Eligible-population estimatesHow the funnel changes as criteria move.
- Plain-language rationaleEvery finding explained, labeled as AI, and auditable.
Site Performance Index
Compare site enrollment performance
Site selection runs on reputation and spreadsheets. The Site Performance Index compares sites on real recruiting signals from the public record and the MyTrial network — recruiting breadth, study mix, and activity over time — so feasibility starts from evidence.
The index methodology is published openly on our transparency pages; sites see the same index sponsors do.
How we use AI — openlyPortfolio
Every study, every site, one surface
Your portfolio dashboard brings recruiting posture together: studies, sites, screening flow, and the protocol findings that explain them — one substrate instead of a quarterly slide deck.
Request a demoWant to see it on your own protocol? We'll walk you through it — humans included.
Request a demo