Plan your next trial on mastered site intelligence.
The ground the trial will run on, resolved before the first site is chosen. One golden record per site and investigator — built from internal, public, and subscribed sources — searchable, mappable, and queryable in plain language.
Every site and investigator, resolved to one golden record.
Vivo masters trial data spanning sites, investigators, and assets — deduplicated and reconciled across your historical trials, public registries, and subscribed data sources. For feasibility and site-strategy teams, that means competitive intelligence and trial planning on data you can actually trust.
View and filter by specialty, geography, therapeutic area, and past participation
Internal performance history alongside public and subscribed sources
Compare a site’s performance for you vs. everyone else
Searchable, mappable, and queryable in plain language via Ask Vivo
Site 4021 · Academic Medical Center · Neurology
Resolved from 4 sources · 3 duplicate records merged
17 (9 oncology)
94 days
+12% historical
2 in indication
3 investigators linked · dropout history · deviation rates · data quality history
Scenario A · 42 sites · 6 countries
LPI in 14 mo
Scenario B · 61 sites · 9 countries
LPI in 11 mo · 19 more sites
Scenario C · shortlist only · 28 sites
LPI in 19 mo
Expected performance tailored per site from past performance · assumptions editable and documented
Enrollment scenarios built on real site history.
Create enrollment scenarios from site and investigator shortlists. Capture data from feasibility reports, tailor expected site performance metrics based on past performance, and compare the scenarios side by side — speed, scale, and risk made explicit before commitments are made.
Shortlists drawn directly from mastered site and investigator records
Site-level expected performance grounded in history, not averages
Vendor planning: the vendor slate captured alongside the site plan
Compare actuals back to the plan throughout the trial
The questions planning teams ask.
Have any of the sites I’m considering struggled with recruitment historically?
How many patients did Site 103 recruit across all oncology studies this year?
Have any of my planned sites had high dropout in past studies?
In our last trial, could we have predicted that Site X would enroll zero patients?
In the last 3 years, what’s my worst site across all trials in oncology?
Who is running a competing trial and when does it start? What sites are they using?
Of our historic trials in immunology, list the top 20 slowest sites to start up.
For Site X, how have they performed for us vs. other sponsors in rare diseases?
Which sites have high rates of protocol deviations?
The system that selects your sites can also monitor them.
Plans made here give the running trial a warm start: the same golden records and expectations carry into Trial Oversight — no handoff to another vendor, one governed foundation end to end.
Site intelligence is in early access with launch partners.
Proven on internal and subscribed data from large pharma. Join the early program to plan your next trial on mastered site intelligence.
