This report examines the industry perception of the EDC and eCOA/ePRO markets based on the responses of over 150 industry professionals experienced with these systems. ISR has asked respondents how their respective companies handle the decisions associated with outsourcing these systems as well as how they would prefer the outsourcing be handled. Additionally, ISR has benchmarked 22 EDC and 22 eCOA/ePRO systems based on 651 EDC and 432 ePRO service provider encounters. Each provider’s performance is evaluated and benchmarked based on the performance of these providers against expectations across 18-21 attributes. Learn more: http://www.isrreports.com/product/edc-and-ecoaepro-market-dynamics-and-service-provider-performance-2015/

1. 20152015
EDC and eCOA/ePRO
Market Dynamics
and Service Provider
Performance (2015)
Info@ISRreports.com
©2015 Industry Standard Research www.ISRreports.com
PREVIEW

2. www.ISRreports.com ©2015 | Preview of: EDC and eCOA/ePRO Market Dynamics and Service Provider Performance (2015) 2
act with confidence
Report Overview
This report examines the industry perception of the EDC and eCOA/ePRO markets based on
the responses of over 150 industry professionals experienced with these systems. ISR has asked
respondents how their respective companies handle the decisions associated with outsourcing
these systems as well as how they would prefer the outsourcing be handled. Additionally, ISR has
benchmarked 22 EDC and 22 eCOA/ePRO systems based on 651 EDC and 432 ePRO service provider
encounters. Each provider’s performance is evaluated and benchmarked based on the performance of
these providers against expectations across 18-21 attributes.
166Respondents
136Pages
121Charts and Graphs
Q2,
2015
Publication Date
1. Executive Summary: In this section, ISR summarizes the key findings found throughout the
report. The majority of these data are examined in more detail in the subsequent sections.
2. EDC Market Environment: Examines how respondents’ companies are utilizing EDC
systems, how these systems are impacting clinical trial activity, and how they could see
these systems improved moving forward.
3. EDC Provider Selection Criteria: Outlines the criteria by which sponsors and CROs select
service providers for EDC-related services as well as respondents’ preferences for specific
EDC platforms.
4. EDC Service Provider Performance: Evaluates the performance of 22 different EDC service
providers across 18 different performance attributes.
5. eCOA/ePRO Market Environment: Examines how respondents’ companies are utilizing
eCOA/ePRO systems, how these systems are impacting clinical trial activity, and how they
could see these systems improved moving forward.
6. eCOA/ePRO Provider Selection Criteria: Outlines the criteria by which sponsors and
CROs select service providers for eCOA/ePRO-related services as well as respondents’
preferences for specific eCOA/ePRO technologies.
7. eCOA/ePRO Service Provider Performance: Evaluates the performance of 22 different
eCOA/ePRO service providers across 21 different performance attributes.
8. Demographics: Provides the reader with an understanding of the demographics for the
166 respondents whose opinions are gathered and evaluated in this report.
• Project Managers
• Outsourcing
• Clinical Operations
• Data Management
• CROs
• Technology Service Providers
Major Sections:
Regions Analyzed: Valuable for:
56% North America
35% Europe
10% Asia, Latin America, Middle East/India

3. www.ISRreports.com ©2015 | Preview of: EDC and eCOA/ePRO Market Dynamics and Service Provider Performance (2015) 3
act with confidence
Report Metrics
What you will learn in this report:
For Sponsors and CROs:
• 651 EDC product experiences and 432 ePRO
product experiences with 22 EDC and 22
eCOA/ePRO products
• Past and future penetration of EDC
and ePRO technologies (by phase of
development)
• Which technology providers have the
best integration capabilities with other
technologies
For Technology Providers:
• Detailed performance profiles, product
satisfaction, and end-user preference for
44 major technology providers across core
performance attributes
• Current and future adoption estimates for
EDC and eCOA/ePRO technologies
How you can use this report:
For Sponsors and CROs:
• Select or uncover a new technology partner
that enhances your relationships with sites
by understanding the needs, wants, and
preferences of clinical sites
• Learn how sites, CROs, and sponsors would
recommend improving the trial process
• Benchmark your organization’s use of EDC
and eCOA/ePRO against broad industry
averages
For Technology Providers:
• Benchmark your performance against your
competition
• Anticipate how changes in trial volume and
adoption/penetration will affect your future
business opportunities
• Identify operational improvements and
product characteristics that impact trial
• Acceliant/Trianz
• BioClinica/Express EDC
• CiSIV
• Clinical Ink
• Clinipace (Tempo)
• Clinovo/ClinCapture
• Cmed (Timaeus)
• DataLabs
• DATATRAK
• DSG
• Forte Research Systems/Overture
EDC
• Medidata (Rave)
• MedNet Solutions
• Medrio
• Merge eClinical OS
• Nextrials (Prism)
• Octagon (Fuse)
• OmniComm (TrialMaster)
• OpenClinica
• Oracle/Phase Forward (InForm)
• Target Health
• Xclinical (Marvin)
• Almac
• AMC Health
• Biomedical Systems
(Michelangelo)
• Bracket Global/Arrowhead
• Clinipace (Tempo)
• ClinPhone IVR ePRO (by
PAREXEL)
• CRF Health (TrialMax)
• DATATRAK ONE UX Patient Data
Capture
• DSG (eDiaryLink)
• ePharmaSolutions
• ERT/invivodata (diarypro/ sitepro)
• Exco Intouch
• ICOPhone (by ICON Clinical)
• Inspire
• Medidata Patient Cloud
• mProve Health (formerly
Omniscience)
• OutcomeLogix (by Oracle)
• PatientsLikeMe
• PharmaNet/i3 IRT (by inVentiv
Health Clinical)
• PHT
• Symfo
• Y-Prime
eCOA/ePRO Products Included:
EDC Products Included:

4. www.ISRreports.com ©2015 | Preview of: EDC and eCOA/ePRO Market Dynamics and Service Provider Performance (2015) 4
act with confidence
Table of Contents
For full table of contents and additional sample pages, download the full
preview from: www.isrreports.com/?p=5699

5. www.ISRreports.com ©2015 | Preview of: EDC and eCOA/ePRO Market Dynamics and Service Provider Performance (2015) 5
act with confidence
act with confidence
Introduction
www.ISRreports.com ©2015 | EDC and eCOA/ePRO Market Dynamics and Service Provider Performance (2015) 7
Introduction
Electronic data capture (EDC), electronic clinical outcome assessments (eCOA),
and electronic patient reported outcomes (ePRO) systems have become essential
and effective tools to appropriately capture, review, and even present the data
accumulated throughout the course of a clinical trial� While paper CRFs are still
preferred by some respondents, that figure is dwindling� EDC has become the
standard tool for its job in clinical trials across the board� Similarly, eCOA and ePRO
systems ensure that the data collected during a clinical trial are of the highest quality�
Ever more, sponsors and CROs alike are turning to these systems to ensure the highest
quality data and to save money by reducing trial delays associated with data capture
difficulties�
This report examines the industry perception of the EDC and eCOA/ePRO markets
based on the responses of over 150 industry professionals experienced with these
systems� ISR has asked respondents how their respective companies handle the
decisions associated with outsourcing these systems as well as how they would prefer
the outsourcing be handled� Additionally, ISR has benchmarked 22 EDC and 22 eCOA/
ePRO systems based on 651 EDC and 432 ePRO service provider encounters� Each
provider’s performance is benchmarked based on the performance of these providers
against expectations across 18-21 attributes� While the specifics of these ratings are
contained within this report, ISR wanted to include a comparison of a piece of this
year’s data to historical data captured in a previous version of this report� In 2013,
ISR found that 2 providers accounted for over 50% of the EDC service encounters of
respondents� Similarly, 4 companies accounted for over 50% of eCOA/ePRO service
encounters� Interestingly, as the market for these services grows, so too does the
space for additional successful providers of these services� In this year’s report, 5 EDC
providers and 7 ePRO providers make up over 50% of service encounters�
www.ISRreports.com
©2015| EDC
and
eCOA/ePRO
Market
Dynamics
and
Service
Provider
Performance
(2015)
7
Introduction
Electronic data capture (EDC), electronic clinical outcome assessments (eCOA), and
electronic patient reported outcomes (ePRO) systems have become essential and
effective tools to appropriately capture, review and even present the data accumulated
throughout the course of a clinical trial. While paper CRFs are still preferred by some
respondents, that figure is dwindling. EDC has become the standard tool for its job in
clinical trials across the board. Similarly, eCOA and ePRO systems ensure that the data
collected during a clinical trial are of the highest quality. Ever more, sponsors and
CROs alike are turning to these systems to ensure the highest quality data, and to save
money by reducing trial delays associated to difficulties related with data capture.
This report examines the industry perception of the EDC and eCOA/ePRO markets
based on the responses of over 150 industry professionals experienced with these
systems. ISR has asked respondents how their respective companies handle the
decisions associated with outsourcing these systems as well as how they would prefer
the outsourcing be handled. Additionally, ISR has benchmarked 22 EDC and 22
eCOA/ePRO systems based on 651 EDC and 432 ePRO service provider encounters.
Each provider’s performance is benchmarked based on the performance of these
providers against expectations across 18/21 attributes. While the specifics of these
ratings are contained within this report, ISR wanted to include a comparison of a piece
of this year’s data to historical data captured in a previous version of this report. In
2013, ISR found that 2 providers accounted for over 50% of the EDC service
encounters of respondents. Similarly, 4 companies accounted for over 50% of
eCOA/ePRO service encounters. Interestingly, as the market for these services grows,
so too does the space for additional successful providers of these services. In this
year’s report, 5 EDC providers and 7 ePRO providers make up over 50% of service
encounters.
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
%ofServiceEncounters
Provider Concentration
EDC ePRO
Number of providers
Provider Concentration (2015)
Sample Page

6. www.ISRreports.com ©2015 | Preview of: EDC and eCOA/ePRO Market Dynamics and Service Provider Performance (2015) 6
act with confidence
act with confidence
Executive Summary
www.ISRreports.com ©2015 | EDC and eCOA/ePRO Market Dynamics and Service Provider Performance (2015) 20
Service Provider Performance by Category
ISR asked respondents to rate each eCOA/ePRO provider they have recently used
across 21 different dimensions of performance� ISR’s methodology for doing so
asks each user to rate the service’s performance vs� the user’s expectations for each
dimension� Scores are assigned to ratings as follows:
• Greatly exceeded my expectations; +3
• Somewhat exceeded my expectations: +1
• Met my expectations: 0
• Somewhat fell short of my expectations: -1
• Greatly fell short of my expectations: -3
ISR then organized these attributes into categories and produced an average score
for each category� The chart below shows the first, second, and third highest rated
companies by category as well as those companies that were close contenders�
ERT/invivodata (diarypro/sitepro) and ClinPhone IVR ePRO (by PAREXEL) appear in
the top 4 in 5 of the 6 performance categories� Outcome Logix (by Oracle) despite
not being heavily used by respondents ranked in the top 2 in 4 of six categories� This
suggests that in addition to OutcomeLogix exceeding performance expectations by
users, they may have opportunity for growth� ERT/invivodata and ClinPhone both
have high performance scores but are also used more often than OutcomeLogix� For
sponsors, it may be worth exploring the services offered by OutcomeLogix, particularly
since one of the categories in which they lead is Reasonableness of Cost.
Attributes
Rated Highest Second Highest Third Highest Close Contenders
Overall
satisfaction
ERT/invivodata
(diarypro/sitepro)
Medidata Patient
Cloud
CRF Health (TrialMax)
Inspire
ClinPhone IVR ePRO
(PAREXEL)
Almac
Reasonableness
of Cost
OutcomeLogix
(Oracle)
AMC Health
ClinPhone IVR ePRO
(PAREXEL)
Biomedical Systems
(Michelangelo)
Usability
ERT/invivodata
(diarypro/sitepro)
OutcomeLogix
(Oracle)
Almac
ClinPhone IVR ePRO
(PAREXEL)
System/Device
Integration
OutcomeLogix
(Oracle)
ClinPhone IVR
ePRO (PAREXEL)
ERT/invivodata
(diarypro/sitepro)
AMC Health
CRF Health (TrialMax)
System Flexibility
and Support
ERT/invivodata
(diarypro/sitepro)
ClinPhone IVR
ePRO (PAREXEL)
Almac PHT
Validation
and Patient
Compliance
ERT/invivodata
(diarypro/sitepro)
OutcomeLogix
(Oracle)
Biomedical Systems
(Michelangelo)
ClinPhone IVR ePRO
(PAREXEL)
Sample Page
Attributes
Rated Highest Second Highest Third Highest Close Contenders
Overall
satisfaction
Company A Company C
Company F
Company J
Company E
Company G
Reasonableness
of Cost
Company B Company D Company E Company H
Usability Company A Company B
Company G
Company E
System/Device
Integration
Company B Company E Company A
Company G
Company F
System Flexibility
and Support
Company A Company E
Company G
Company I
Validation
and Patient
Compliance
Company A Company B Company H Company E
Service Provider Performance by Category
ISR asked respondents to rate each eCOA/ePRO provider they have recently used across 21
different dimensions of performance. ISR’s methodology for doing so asks each user to rate the
service’s performance vs. the user’s expectations for each dimension. Scores are assigned to
ratings as follows:
• Greatly exceeded my expectations: +3
• Somewhat exceeded my expectations: +1
• Met my expectations: 0
• Somewhat fell short of my expectations: -1
• Greatly fell short of my expectations: -3
ISR then organized these attributes into categories and produced an average score for each
category. The chart below shows the first, second, and third highest rated companies
by category as well as those companies that were close contenders.
Company A and Company E appear in the top 4 in 5 of the 6 performance
categories. Company B despite not being heavily used by respondents ranked
in the top 2 in 4 of six categories. This suggests that in addition to Company B
exceeding performance expectations by users, they may have opportunity for growth.
Company A and Company E both have high performance scores but are also used
more often than Company B. For sponsors, it may be worth exploring the services
offered by Company B, particularly since one of the categories in which they lead is
Reasonableness of Cost.

7. www.ISRreports.com ©2015 | Preview of: EDC and eCOA/ePRO Market Dynamics and Service Provider Performance (2015) 7
act with confidence
Sample Page
act with confidence
EDC Provider Selection Criteria
www.ISRreports.com ©2015 | EDC and eCOA/ePRO Market Dynamics and Service Provider Performance (2015) 42
Contract Directly vs� Going
through CRO for EDC
Components
Roughly half the time, sponsors contract directly with an EDC provider as opposed to
going through the CRO� Moving forward, this figure is expected to increase by roughly
10 percentage points� Similarly, moving forward, CROs expect a decline in how often
the sponsor almost always contracts through our organization (being the CRO)�
Currently 52% of respondents from CROs say this, but in three years’ time, only 39% of
CRO respondents expect this to be the case�
“Currently, when your organization is using a CRO for a clinical study that has an EDC
component, what percent of the time do you contract directly with an EDC provider
as opposed to going through the CRO?” (Base=50; sponsors only)
“Thinking three years into the future, when your organization is using a CRO for a
clinical study that has an EDC component, what percent of the time will you contract
directly with an EDC provider as opposed to going through the CRO?” (Base=48;
sponsors only)
43%
52%

8. www.ISRreports.com ©2015 | Preview of: EDC and eCOA/ePRO Market Dynamics and Service Provider Performance (2015) 8
act with confidence
Sample Page
For full table of contents and additional sample pages, download the full
preview from: www.isrreports.com/?p=5699

9. www.ISRreports.com ©2015 | Preview of: EDC and eCOA/ePRO Market Dynamics and Service Provider Performance (2015) 9
act with confidence
Ordering Information
Industry Standard Research (ISR) is the premier, full service market research provider to the pharma and pharma services indus-
tries. With over a decade of experience in the industry, ISR delivers an unmatched level of domain expertise.
For more information about our off-the-shelf intelligence and custom research offerings, please visit our Web site at
www.ISRreports.com, email info@ISRreports.com, or follow us on twitter @ISRreports.
About Industry Standard Research
Save on this,
or any ISR
report, by
registering a
free account
Register now
• Receive a $250 instant credit towards any ISR report
• Earn 10% credit towards all future purchases
• Receive advanced notifications on ISR’s latest reports and free resources
For pricing and ordering information visit: www.isrreports.com/?p=5699

10. www.ISRreports.com ©2015 | Preview of: EDC and eCOA/ePRO Market Dynamics and Service Provider Performance (2015) 10
act with confidence
www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: Benchmarking the Pharma Industry’s HEOR Functions 10
act with confidence
www.ISRreports.com ©2015 | Preview of: Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Disease and Pipeline Analysis 10
act with confidence
www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: Benchmarking the Pharma Industry’s HEOR Functions 10
act with confidence
www.ISRreports.com ©2014 | Preview of: Benchmarking European Investigator Payments 10
act with confidence
www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: Benchmarking the Pharma Industry’s HEOR Functions 10
act with confidence
The ISR Difference
Custom-quality syndicated market research
www.ISRreports.com
ISR's Reports
The Common
Syndicated Reportvs.
How confident are you?
vs.
DataCollection
ISR's proprietary data collection
tools and channels support fast,
high quality data collection
Struggle to recruit the right
targets and enough of them
vs.
SampleSizes
Robust sample sizes that
instill confidence
Often insufficient industry
representation that leaves you
defending results
vs.vs.
Research methods
Mostly primary
research;
always appropriate
for the topic
One size fits all;
usually publically
available data
vs.vs.
Respondents
Sophisticated screening
ensures genuine
decision-makers
Undisclosed
methodologies and
respondent demographics
vs.vs.
Analysts
Decades of experience
means more insights that are
immediately usable
Junior analysts capable of
reporting numbers