Register Now - Beyond Recruitment: The Future of Patient Site Engagement in Oncology Clinical Trials
Commentary|Videos|October 9, 2025

Balancing Human Oversight and Automation in AI-Driven Trials

Understand how adaptive human-in-the-loop frameworks can maintain safety and decision quality as AI becomes more embedded in trial monitoring and data review.

In a recent video interview with Applied Clinical Trials, Michelle Longmire, MD, co-founder and CEO of Medable, discussed the role of agentic artificial intelligence (AI) in clinical trials. She highlighted that 45% of clinical development time is wasted due to delays and siloed data. Agentic AI aims to reduce this by leveraging technology in areas previously untouched, freeing up human resources for strategic work. The human-in-the-loop concept ensures that AI supports, rather than replaces, human decision-making. Integration of AI across legacy systems is facilitated by model context protocols, reducing manual effort. Automation handles routine tasks, while critical decisions remain human-controlled. No-code platforms for AI tools require clear job descriptions and validation similar to human training.

ACT: How can human-in-the-loop oversight be preserved when introducing AI-driven tools for critical clinical trial functions like monitoring, planning, and data review?

Longmire: The human in the loop part of agentic AI is critical in any high stakes environment, and certainly in clinical development. With Agent Studio—we knew this going in—we're able to essentially imagine kind of like a lever that you can pull, full human in the loop all the way to fully autonomous. When you look at specific actions, specific goals, specific decisions, you want those to be highly human in the loop, and maybe human in the loop at a very frequent and regular basis, maybe human in the loop for the final decision. Ultimately, that's up to what goal and task you're out to bring agentic AI into. I think having that as a dial up and dial down is really, really important. I'd say beyond just having a single human in the loop, we want to be able to use AI to even augment the way that humans are making those final decisions. You imagine today, you're monitoring a site, and you're looking across data from 13 different systems, and you're trying to make a critical decision, but not only are you looking at disparate data, that decision in the optionality is limited to your own mind. With agentic AI, not only can we have human in the loop, but we can actually surface potential options for those decisions that might not be those that are the only ones that come to the mind of the human.


Related to this article

What Expanding AI Ecosystems Mean for Sponsor Complexity and Oversight
In this video interview, Rajneesh Patil, global head of AI, digital, and innovation in clinical development at Syneos Health, argues that CROs must act as orchestrators rather than aggregators—and that the real test of any AI ecosystem is whether it reduces sponsor coordination burden or just hands it back to them.
Where AI Governance in Clinical Development Falls Short
In this video interview, Rajneesh Patil, global head of AI, digital, and innovation in clinical development at Syneos Health, identifies three recurring failure modes in AI governance frameworks—and explains why responsible AI must be an ongoing operating discipline, not a one-time approval gate.
© Grispb - © Grispb - stock.adobe.com
Mistral and OpenAI produced identical overall eligibility labels across 200 synthetic patient-study assessments, with criterion-level disagreements concentrated in inclusion criteria where models switch between “Uncertain” and “Not included” when records lack sufficient evidence, so model choice should be driven by deployment architecture, control, and cost rather than assumed interchangeability.
The Human Side of Clinical Trials: Before Burden Becomes Risk, Capturing Friction in Real Time
In Episode 4 of The Human Side of Clinical Trials, host Brian S. McGowan, PhD, FACEHP, chief learning officer and co-founder of ArcheMedX, Inc., speaks with Jason Riis, PhD, CEO and chief behavioral scientist at Behavioralize, about how capturing friction closer to the moment it happens can reveal unclear instructions, technology friction, and workarounds that retrospective surveys and debriefs tend to miss.
Building AI Assistants Clinical Trial Teams Can Trust: Q&A with E.K. Koh, Suvoda
In this Q&A, E.K. Koh, chief product officer at Suvoda, discusses what separates a trustworthy AI assistant from one that adds risk, why curated clinical knowledge matters more than general-purpose flexibility, and what safeguards must be in place when assistants move from answering questions to taking actions in clinical trial systems.