The TrialBridge platform
One traceable path from protocol text to site recruitment.
Eight modules, each tied to a stage of the research workflow. Every preview below is a working interface built with synthetic data — try them.
Product overview
Structured eligibility, human screening, visible recruitment.
TrialBridge helps research teams structure a protocol’s eligibility criteria, explore potentially eligible cohorts within authorised datasets, coordinate candidate screening across sites, and see where recruitment stalls. Each step keeps a link to the step before it.
- Built for
- Research hospitals, site networks, CROs and sponsors
- First release data
- Synthetic and de-identified datasets via CSV import
- Decisions
- Always made and recorded by people
Protocol-to-recruitment workflow
Each stage hands a versioned object to the next.
Stage 1 of 5 · Research operations manager
Protocol
Keep the protocol and its amendments as the single source of truth for eligibility.
- Key action
- Upload the protocol PDF or DOCX. TrialBridge extracts the text with page and section anchors.
- Output
- Protocol v1.1 · 24 pages · eligibility sections located
- Leads to Criteria
- The located inclusion and exclusion passages become the input for structured criteria.
Output examples come from the synthetic trial SYN-CKD-201.
Module 01 · MVP scope
Protocol Studio
Store protocol documents and versions, extract text with page anchors, and review proposed eligibility criteria beside the passages they came from.
- Primary user
- Protocol reviewer
- Place in the workflow
- Protocol → Criteria
- Why it matters
- One reviewed, versioned source of eligibility logic per trial, so checklists and queries can’t drift apart.
§5.1(a) · p.18Participants must be between 40 and 75 years of age, inclusive, at the time of screening.
§5.1(c) · p.18Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) between 30 and 59 mL/min/1.73 m², based on the most recent value within 90 days before screening.
§5.1(d) · p.18HbA1c of at least 7.0% and no greater than 10.5%, based on the most recent value within 90 days before screening.
Synopsis · p.3Key inclusion: adults aged 40–75 with type 2 diabetes, eGFR 30–59, and HbA1c 7.0–10.0%.
§5.2(b) · p.19Participants with any history of chronic dialysis or kidney transplantation will be excluded.
§5.2(c) · p.19Heart failure classified as New York Heart Association (NYHA) class IV.
§5.1(f) · p.18Able and willing to provide written informed consent and to comply with study procedures, in the opinion of the investigator.
§5.1(d) · p.18HbA1c of at least 7.0% and no greater than 10.5%, based on the most recent value within 90 days before screening.
- Analyte
- HbA1c
- Operator
- Between (inclusive)
- Range
- 7.0–10.5 %
- Value used
- Most recent
- Window
- 90 days before run date
- Review status
- Pending professional approval
Passages disagree: the synopsis (p.3) says ≤ 10.0 %; §5.1(d) (p.18) says ≤ 10.5 %. A reviewer must choose which applies.
Module 02 · MVP scope
Eligibility Criteria Builder
Represent each criterion as a typed condition — age, lab value, condition, medication, procedure, measurement, time window — with explicit units and missing-data behaviour.
- Primary user
- Protocol reviewer
- Place in the workflow
- Criteria
- Why it matters
- Criteria become precise enough to check against data, and anything that isn’t stays flagged for a screener.
If no value falls in the window, the result is Unknown — it is never treated as “does not meet”.
Plain-language preview
Include if the most recent eGFR within 90 days before the run date is between 30 and 59 mL/min/1.73 m², inclusive.
- Type
- LAB
- Computability
- Data-checkable
- Source
- Required before approval
- Status
- Draft · not approved
Module 03 · MVP scope
Cohort Discovery
Evaluate approved criteria against datasets authorised for the trial. See potential matches, data gaps, and criterion-level evidence for each record.
- Primary user
- Recruitment manager
- Place in the workflow
- Criteria → Cohort
- Why it matters
- Repeatable pre-screening against data the organisation already governs, with missing data kept visible.
Trial
SYN-CKD-201 · T2D with moderate CKD
Approved criteria
v1.1 · 9 data-checkable · 3 left to screeners
Demo playback: these results were computed in advance from synthetic records.
Query preview
Evaluate approved criteria v1.1 against DS-A as of the run date. Each record gets a result per criterion: Met, Not met or Unknown. Records with any Unknown stay in the list, marked with their data gaps.
- HbA1c in last 90 days82 %
- eGFR in last 90 days91 %
- NYHA class (if heart failure)64 %
Field coverage in DS-A · illustrative synthetic profile
Module 04 · MVP scope
Candidate Screening
Queues scoped by site, a criteria checklist with evidence, missing-information requests, reviewer assignment, and a status history with a recorded reason for every change.
- Primary user
- Research coordinator · site investigator
- Place in the workflow
- Cohort → Screening
- Why it matters
- A shared, auditable record of who decided what and why — instead of a spreadsheet per site.
33 records · showing 8
CND-0042
SYN-CKD-201 · SITE-02 · reviewer A. Reyes · contact permission: Unknown
Criteria checklist
- I1Age 40–75Met
- I2Type 2 diabetes recordedMet
- I3eGFR 30–59, ≤ 90 dMet
- I4HbA1c 7.0–10.5 %, ≤ 90 dMet
- E2Dialysis / transplantNo record found
- E3NYHA class IVUnknown
- I6Able to consentNot evaluated against data
Missing information: E3 — Heart failure recorded; NYHA class not recorded. The data can’t answer this; a coordinator can.
Activity history
- 2026-11-03 07:12SystemAdded from cohort run COH-0007 (criteria v1.1)
- 2026-11-03 07:12SystemAssigned to SITE-02 by catchment rule
- 2026-11-03 08:05K. MensahReviewer set to A. Reyes
Workflow states record what a person decided and why. They are not automated clinical determinations — final eligibility is decided by the investigator under the protocol.
Permitted transitions
- Awaiting Review
- More Information Required Coordinator
- Potentially Eligible Coordinator
- Not Eligible Coordinator
- More Information Required
- Potentially Eligible Coordinator
- Not Eligible Coordinator
- Potentially Eligible
- Investigator Review Coordinator
- More Information Required Coordinator
- Not Eligible Coordinator
- Investigator Review
- Potentially Eligible Investigator
- More Information Required Investigator
- Not Eligible Investigator
- Not Eligible
- Awaiting Review Recruitment manager (reopen)
Module 05 · MVP scope
Research Site Operations
A directory of participating sites with assigned trials, screening workload, contact roles, recruitment events and operational alerts.
- Primary user
- Recruitment manager · site staff
- Place in the workflow
- Screening → Research site
- Why it matters
- Uneven workloads and quiet sites become visible early enough to reassign work.
Fictional sites
SITE-03 · SYN-CKD-201 active
Easton Ridge Clinical Research Center
- Assigned
- 24
- Awaiting review
- 15
- More info required
- 2
- Investigator review
- 2
- Median wait (awaiting)
- 12 d
Enrolled 0 of target 10 · consent recorded 1
Consent and enrollment are events recorded by site staff.
Operational alerts
- No screening activity in 9 days (threshold: 7).
- Oldest awaiting record has waited 16 days.
Contact roles
- Site principal investigator assigned in workspace
- Lead coordinator assigned in workspace
- Data contact optional
Module 06 · MVP scope
Recruitment Analytics
Funnels, outcome distributions, trends and screen-fail reasons — each with a defined source and calculation, and drill-through to the records behind it.
- Primary user
- Research operations director · recruitment manager
- Place in the workflow
- All stages → Intelligence
- Why it matters
- Questions about recruitment get answered from records, not from manual tallies.
Recruitment funnel
How many candidates reached each stage, and where the biggest drop happens.
- Identified95
- Review started4143 %
- Potentially eligible1741 %
- Investigator review1165 %
- Consent recorded655 %
- Enrolled467 %
Largest absolute drop is before review starts: 54 candidates are still awaiting a first review — a backlog, not screen failures.
Screening outcome distribution
Where all 95 candidates stand right now.
Reasons for Not Eligible
Which criteria most often end screening — a prompt to check data quality or criterion wording.
Candidates added per week
The pace at which potential matches enter screening across 8 synthetic weeks.
Module 07 · MVP scope
Data Connections
Import authorised datasets with a data-use declaration, map fields to the research schema, validate units, dates and codes, and review errors before confirming.
- Primary user
- Data integration administrator · clinical data manager
- Place in the workflow
- Authorised data → Cohort
- Why it matters
- Data problems surface at import, where they can be fixed, rather than inside a cohort result.
- Upload
- Scan
- Map fields
- Validate
- Confirm
- Rows
- 18,412
- Valid
- 18,053
- Warnings
- 312
- Rejected
- 47
- 312 HbA1c rows use mmol/mol. They can be converted to % — or left as Unknown.
- 47 rows have unparseable dates in observed_on. They won’t be queryable.
- Identifier scan: no direct identifiers detected in this synthetic file.
measurements.csv · synthetic file · counts illustrative
Module 08 · MVP scope
Governance and Audit
An append-only record of criteria approvals, permission changes, dataset authorisations, cohort runs, screening decisions and exports — searchable and exportable.
- Primary user
- Compliance and audit reviewer
- Place in the workflow
- Across every stage
- Why it matters
- Anyone accountable for a study can see what happened, in order, with the person responsible.
- 09:42J. Okaforprotocol_version.approvedSYN-CKD-201 v1.1 · spec hash 3f9c…a1
- 09:44K. Mensahdataset.authorized_for_trialDS-A → SYN-CKD-201 · second approver L. Duarte
- 09:51K. Mensahcohort.run_completedCOH-0007 · 95 potential matches
- 10:06A. Reyesscreening.status_changedCND-0042 · Awaiting Review → More Information Required
- 10:20L. Duartereport.downloadedRecruitment progress · CSV
See the whole workflow with your team.
We’ll walk through a synthetic trial from protocol to site, and talk about what a pilot with your own governance in place would need.