8.7
Excellent
376 reviews
- Communication
- 8.8
- Timeliness
- 8.9
- Accuracy
- 7.6
- Staff
- 8.8
- Value
- 8.9
Jackie Keeling II
9.2
- - Data Visualization
- - 3 weeks December 2023
- - Pharmaceutical Company
Reviewed:
Highly effective data visualization, easy to interpret and impactful.
The data visualization services were highly effective, making complex data easy to interpret and communicate. The visualizations were impactful and played a crucial role in our stakeholder presentations.
Claudia Zieme
8.9
- - Medical Writing
- - 5 weeks October - November 2023
- - Biotech Company
Reviewed:
Top-quality medical writing, clear and precise documents.
The medical writing services provided were of top quality. The documents were clear, precise, and tailored to meet the specific requirements of our regulatory submissions. The team's expertise was evident throughout the process.
Domingo Lockman
9
- - Process Development
- - 12 weeks March - May 2024
- - Biotech Company
Reviewed:
Expert process development, enhanced efficiency.
The process development services enhanced our manufacturing efficiency significantly. The team's expertise in process optimization was evident, and they provided valuable insights that improved our production workflow.
Mr. Donald Romaguera-Will
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.
Doug Mayer II
8.8
- - Biostatistical Design
- - 4 weeks May - June 2023
- - Research Institution
Reviewed:
Excellent biostatistical support, clear and actionable insights.
The biostatistical support provided was top-notch, offering clear and actionable insights that were critical to the success of our study. The team was responsive and worked closely with us to ensure the analysis met our specific needs.
Vincent Gleichner MD
6.2
- - Clinical Protocol Design
- - 10 weeks January - March 2024
- - Pharmaceutical Company
Reviewed:
Inconsistent quality of deliverables, frequent revisions needed.
The protocol design process required multiple revisions due to inconsistencies in the deliverables. Although the team was responsive to feedback, the back-and-forth extended the timeline beyond what was originally agreed upon.
Joseph Padberg
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.
Claudia Hegmann
6.5
- - Regulatory Submission
- - 8 weeks May - July 2024
- - Pharmaceutical Company
Reviewed:
Regulatory submission was incomplete, required additional work.
The initial regulatory submission provided was incomplete, requiring additional work to meet the necessary standards. This resulted in unexpected costs and delays. The team corrected the issues, but it should have been right the first time.
