8.7
Excellent
376 reviews
- Communication
- 8.8
- Timeliness
- 8.9
- Accuracy
- 7.6
- Staff
- 8.8
- Value
- 8.9
Pablo Doyle
5.7
- - Project Management
- - 12 weeks March - May 2024
- - Biotech Company
Reviewed:
Poor communication and missed deadlines caused frustration.
Communication from the project management team was poor, with frequent missed deadlines. This caused significant frustration on our end, as we had to repeatedly chase them for updates. The project eventually got back on track, but the delays were problematic.
Steven Rice
9.4
- - Health Technology Assessment
- - 10 weeks September - November 2023
- - Pharmaceutical Company
Reviewed:
Thorough and insightful health technology assessment.
The health technology assessment was thorough and provided valuable insights that were critical to our decision-making process. The team demonstrated a deep understanding of the health economics involved and delivered a well-rounded analysis.
Lula Johnston
5.6
- - Clinical Data Management
- - 8 weeks December 2023 - February 2024
- - Biotech Company
Reviewed:
Delayed delivery and lack of communication during the project.
The data management services were delayed, and communication from the team was lacking. It was difficult to get updates, and when the deliverables arrived, they were not as polished as expected. The delays impacted our project timeline significantly.
Marta Kuhic PhD
8.8
- - Companion Diagnostics Development
- - 16 weeks January - May 2024
- - Pharmaceutical Company
Reviewed:
High-quality companion diagnostics development, delivered on time.
The development of companion diagnostics was of high quality, and the project was delivered on time. The team's technical expertise and understanding of the regulatory environment were key to the success of the project.
Rosalie Skiles-Larson
6.3
- - Stability Studies
- - 16 months July 2023 - November 2024
- - Pharmaceutical Company
Reviewed:
Stability studies lacked detail, required additional validation.
The stability studies conducted were lacking in detail, and we had to perform additional validation to ensure the results were reliable. This added extra time and cost to the project. The team was responsive to feedback, but the initial work was subpar.
Kathy Friesen Jr.
8.6
- - Patient Engagement
- - 8 weeks August - September 2023
- - Clinical Research Organization
Reviewed:
Impressive patient engagement strategies, significant improvement in recruitment rates.
The patient engagement strategies implemented were impressive and led to a significant improvement in our recruitment rates. The team's experience in patient-centered approaches was evident and made a real difference.
Mr. Grady Dooley DVM
9.3
- - Project Management
- - 10 weeks July - September 2023
- - Biotech Company
Reviewed:
Seamless project management, results exceeded expectations.
Project management was seamless, and the team exceeded our expectations. They handled all aspects of the project with professionalism and efficiency, keeping us informed every step of the way.
Reginald Fadel
8.9
- - Stability Studies
- - 18 months January 2023 - June 2024
- - Pharmaceutical Company
Reviewed:
Accurate and reliable stability studies, clear reporting.
The stability studies were conducted with precision, and the reporting was clear and thorough. The results provided us with the necessary data to proceed with our regulatory submissions confidently.
