Skip to content

For research sites

Your population is already screened. You just have not seen it yet.

Every day, patients who meet the criteria of an open protocol pass through your clinics unnoticed — because finding them means reading thousands of charts against pages of prose, and nobody has those hours. Accrual's AI has those hours.

01

You stop screening by hand

A coordinator working through a protocol manually can review a few charts an hour, and only the charts they thought to open. Accrual's models read the whole population against every open protocol and hand back a ranked list with the evidence cited. You review a shortlist instead of a filing cabinet.

02

The clinician sees it in time

Matches arrive inside the workflow the treating clinician already uses, while the patient is still in front of them. That is the only moment the conversation reliably happens.

03

Screen failures drop

Because the model resolves every criterion against a specific line in the chart before the patient is approached — and flags what it cannot settle rather than guessing — fewer patients reach consent and then fail screening, which is where the wasted effort actually sits.

04

Sponsors can find you

Sites that can evidence their population get put on lists they were never on before. That matters most if you are not a major academic centre.

What it costs the site

Nothing

Sites are not the customer. Sponsors and CROs pay — per qualified enrolled patient, or per feasibility study — and that is what funds the platform.

We would rather be direct about the arrangement than pretend it does not exist: your population is what makes the sponsor-side product possible. In exchange you get the matching engine, at no cost, with the data controls above written into the agreement rather than promised on a website.

Data governance

The questions your R&D office will ask, answered plainly.

These are the questions that come up in every information governance review, from the R&D office through to the Caldicott Guardian. None of the answers are hedged, because a hedge here means the review stalls.

Who controls the data?

You do. The site is the controller under the UK GDPR. Accrual is a processor acting on your documented instructions under an executed Article 28 data processing agreement, and for no other purpose. Where you operate a Caldicott Guardian function, the purpose is agreed through it before any record is read.

Does anything leave our environment?

Processing runs within the governance boundary agreed in your data agreement. Nothing is copied out of that boundary for any purpose you have not authorised in writing.

What do sponsors see?

Aggregate, anonymised population evidence — counts, distributions and forecasts. Never records, never identifiers, never individual-level data. Small counts are suppressed rather than reported.

Is our patient data used to train models?

No. Records are processed to answer your questions and are never used to train or fine-tune models, never pooled across sites, and never shared with a model provider for improvement. Zero-retention terms are required of any provider in the path, and this is in the agreement rather than only the policy.

Can we exclude categories of record?

Yes, and it is enforced in processing rather than left to policy. Mental health notes, sexual health records and gender identity information carry heightened confidentiality expectations and are commonly restricted at the site level.

Does Accrual write to the chart?

No. The connection is read-only. The clinical record remains yours and unaltered, and the AI takes no action on a patient — it produces a shortlist for your staff.

Who contacts the patient?

Their own care team, always. Accrual does not contact patients and provides no mechanism for a sponsor to.

The full posture is on the security page, and the patient-data boundary is set out in the patient data notice.

District generals and community trusts

You have the patients. You have never had the infrastructure.

Trial volume has always concentrated in a handful of academic centres — the large teaching trusts with dedicated research staff to do the finding. Diversity requirements are now forcing sponsors to look elsewhere, and elsewhere is you.

No staff

The AI does the notes review, so continuous screening needs no dedicated research nurse

No project

Read-only connection, no data warehouse build, no new system of record

Be found

Population evidence puts your site on sponsor shortlists it would not otherwise reach

For sites

Find out what is already in your population.

Tell us which system you run and roughly how many patients you see. We will tell you honestly whether we can help.