Most AI pilots in drug development fail not from poor technology but from lack of strategic prioritization, organizational readiness, integrated data infrastructure, and disciplined governance, making success dependent on business discipline rather than technical capability.

Clinical trials have spent decades perfecting data capture, but the execution layer underneath it, including decision workflows, data collection design, and lab connectivity, remains fragmented in ways that limit what AI can realistically deliver and that quietly compromise the scientific validity of the data itself.

Participant engagement depends more on clarity and understanding than on gamification or incentives, requiring engagement embedded into trial workflows as a core design component rather than a peripheral consideration

Why clinical development’s next AI bottleneck is not the model, but the system around it.

Regulatory expectations for patient input in drug development have shifted from aspiration to documented methodology across three major jurisdictions.

This episode of The Human Side of Clinical Trials, hosted by Brian S. McGowan, PhD, FACEHP, chief learning officer and co-founder of ArcheMedX, Inc., and Kelly Ritch, chief operating officer of ArcheMedX, Inc., explores why training completion metrics like attendance and quiz scores fail to capture true study readiness, and how measuring both competence and confidence can reveal trial risks before enrollment even begins.

In this video interview, Amélie Lothe, global medical community head for rare epilepsies at UCB Pharma, explains why the full burden of developmental and epileptic encephalopathies extends far beyond clinical symptoms—and why endpoints must reflect what families are actually hoping for.

In this Q&A, John Worden, chief commercial officer at Javara, discusses why clinical trial recruitment has remained stubbornly one-size-fits-all, how AI can identify patients at scale without displacing the clinician relationships that drive trust, and what care-integrated research engagement needs to look like for health systems, sponsors, and sites.