The following Insight is a featured article from WCG’s 2025 Trends & Insights Report. If you would like to read more insights from this report, please click here.
Even if you don’t consider yourself a “techie,” you’ve probably heard the phrase “generative AI” over the last few years. While the use of technology has enormous promise across many areas of the clinical trial industry, there are a host of ethical and operational considerations. Since 2020, we’ve seen a significant surge in the investment and adoption of devices and technology within clinical trials, many focusing heavily on remote monitoring capabilities.
Remote patient monitoring (RPM) and remote therapeutic management (RTM) billing codes across the industry are sparsely used. They’re challenging for providers and require numerous touchpoints and effort spent for a relatively small reimbursement. In my conversations with many physicians, the question often arises, “How valuable is this data to me as a clinician?” I think that’s a question technology developers should consider. I’d take it a step further and ask, “How does this data help the patient?”
Without wider adoption of remote patient monitoring in the broader healthcare industry, we will continue to see clinical trials struggle to push the needle forward in adopting technology in a real-world research setting. For example, so many new solutions bank on participant adoption of technology such as trial matching platforms or ePROs — but if they are built for endpoint collection, what is the value to that particular end user?
If the goal is to expand access to clinical trials, there are a variety of obstacles and ethical considerations when implementing technology. For example, within underserved communities the app you built to monitor their progress in a study is likely the first app they will delete. This isn’t because they’re a “bad research participant,” but rather because many people from lower socio-economic demographics have limited data storage on their phones, leading them to swap out apps when it gets full.
Pew Research highlights that nearly one-quarter (26%) of adults with lower incomes rely exclusively on smartphones for internet access, meaning these devices serve as their primary or sole connection to the digital world. This reliance often results in storage and performance limitations, as they frequently use budget or older devices with restricted capacity. Additionally, affordability issues lead many to prioritize essential apps, uninstalling others when space runs out. Similarly, whether the sponsor has allocated adequate participant stipend funds for internet or cell phone service will heavily impact the success and adoption of your tool.
Regarding technology and access to trials, the answer will always be, “it’s complicated,” but perhaps it doesn’t need to be. My hope for the industry moving into 2025 is that we make better use of our combined goal of expediting drug development by conscientiously developing technology that better supports the people and patients for which they are designed.
Related Insights:
FDA’s Path Toward Diversity in Clinical Trials: The DEPICT Act and Sponsor Responsibility
Whitepapers
The DEI Mandate: What’s on the Horizon and What’s Needed for IRB and Recruitment Processes (Part 1 of 2)
Videos
The DEI Mandate: How to Accelerate Diversity Initiatives with Data Analytics and Planning (Part 2 of 2)
VideosLearn more about our Trends and Insights Report for 2025
Fill out this form to contact WCG with any questions and comments, to learn more about our authors and insights into the 2025 Trends and Insights Report.