Back

Leveraging Predictive AI and LLM-Powered Trial Matching to Improve Clinical Trial Recruitment: A Usability Assessment of Trialshub

Blankson, P.-K.; Hussien, S.; Idris, F.; Trevillion, G.; Aslam, A.; Afani, A.; Dunlap, P.; Chepkorir, J.; Melgarejo, P.; Idris, M.

2026-04-20 health informatics
10.64898/2026.04.17.26351107 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundRecruitment remains a major barrier to timely clinical trial completion. Trialshub is an LLM-powered, chat-based platform intended to help users identify relevant trials and connect with coordinators to streamline recruitment workflows. ObjectiveTo evaluate the perceived usability and operational value of Trialshub, and identify implementation considerations for real-world deployment. MethodsA usability test was conducted at Morehouse School of Medicine for the Trialshub application. Purposively selected participants included clinical research coordinators and individuals with and without clinical trial search experience. Participants completed a pre-test survey assessing demographics, digital health information behaviors, and familiarity with AI tools, followed by a moderated usability session using a Trialshub prototype. Users completed scenario-based tasks (locating a breast cancer trial, reviewing results, and initiating coordinator contact) using a think-aloud protocol. Task ratings, screen recordings, and transcribed feedback were analyzed descriptively and thematically, and reported. ResultsParticipants reported high comfort with using digital tools and moderate-to-high familiarity with AI. Trialshubs chat-first design, guided prompts, and checklist-style eligibility display were perceived as intuitive and reduced cognitive load. Fast access to trials and the coordinator-contact workflow were viewed positively. Key usability issues included uncertainty at step transitions, insufficient cues for selecting results and next actions, and inconsistent system reliability (loading delays, errors, and broken trial detail pages). Participants also noted redundant questioning due to limited conversational memory, requested improved filtering/sorting, and clearer calls-to-action. All participants indicated that Trialshub has strong potential to meaningfully improve clinical trial processes. ConclusionsTrialshub shows promise for improving trial discovery and recruitment workflows, with identified design implications for real-world deployment.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
17.1%
2
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
10.2%
3
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
9.8%
4
DIGITAL HEALTH
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.8%
5
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.2%
50% of probability mass above
6
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.2%
7
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.7%
8
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.9%
9
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.5%
10
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 41%
3.5%
11
Cancer Medicine
24 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.0%
12
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.6%
13
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
14
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.2%
15
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
16
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
17
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
18
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
19
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.9%
20
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
45 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
21
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
22
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 74%
0.8%
23
JMIR Medical Informatics
17 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
24
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
18 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.7%
25
Genetics in Medicine
69 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
26
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
27
International Journal of Medical Informatics
25 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
28
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
29
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%