Many sponsors prioritize low-cost clinical trial sites — but new data shows these can end up being the most expensive. This post explores why faster, better-staffed sites often deliver more value, and how to use cost-performance data to choose smarter.

Despite advances in clinical research, site selection continues to fail due to outdated methods, unreliable data, and missed global opportunities — costing trials time, money, and quality.

40% of clinical trial sites fail to enroll a single patient — and the cost of poor site selection is staggering. In this post, we explore why trials still fall short in 2025, what it’s really costing sponsors, and how smarter strategies can change everything.

CROs, sponsors, and clinical teams can streamline site selection using smarter tools, global networks, and real-world experience. If you're tired of spreadsheets and chasing down sites, this one's for you.