Measuring a research site's recruitment funnel

A recruitment funnel is useful only when everyone knows what each stage means. Agree on local definitions for an enquiry received, contact attempted, person reached, pre-screen completed, site screening scheduled, visit attended, eligibility confirmed and enrolment. The terms and workflow can differ between protocols, so record the site's definitions. Clinrol Connect's recruitment analytics feature page describes its funnel, conversion, drop-off and workload views; teams should still use definitions that fit each study.

For each measure, specify the numerator, denominator and time period. For example, a contact rate should distinguish attempted calls from two-way contact, and a visit attendance rate should make clear which scheduled visits are included. Track dates consistently so the team can review time from enquiry to first contact and later stages.

Record the source of each enquiry and, where appropriate, the reason it did not progress. Useful categories might include unable to reach, person chose not to continue, an initial criterion did not appear to fit, site review needed or visit not attended. Keep categories clear enough to guide action without collecting unnecessary personal detail.

Review progression by study, site, source and time period where the data supports a fair comparison. A change in conversion may reflect the study's criteria, location, contact approach or participant needs, not just staff performance. Small groups can also make results unstable, so avoid treating a single percentage as a universal benchmark.

Keep pre-screen outcomes separate from the site's final eligibility decision. Only the appropriately authorised study team can confirm eligibility under the current protocol. Reporting should show where the workflow needs attention without replacing clinical review or pressuring people to take part.

Use the measures to review the enquiry workflow and ask practical questions: which step has the longest delay, where are people choosing not to continue, and what follow-up or hand-off could be clearer? Review the definitions when a protocol or workflow changes, and restrict reports that contain identifiable information to authorised users.