Medidata Rave CTMS vs. Zelta

I think this is a great tool overall. We aren't using all of the available features of the system (we don't use the system for EDC or site payments for example), so I can't comment on anything other than study and site management

Incentivized

Zelta is a good tool for companies currently utilizing multiple software platforms to create and monitor clinical trial information. Due to the price, it is best suited for large pharmaceutical manufacturers with active pipelines and high R&D spend. Zelta's value is more limited to smaller, more focused companies.

Incentivized

• Study and site creation and management
• Task management
• Tracking key study milestones
• Reporting

Incentivized

• It is highly customizable and easy to program.
• There is a wide variety of data that can be collected from IRB/site information to clinical data.
• Zelta provides comprehensive edit language to program for accurate results.
• Page dynamics are very useful when including or hiding certain data questions.

Incentivized

• Setting up ad hoc reports isn't very intuitive
• System performance issues

Incentivized

• Would like to have more access to report review. Most of the functions are controlled by the initial data management setup of the specific reports. I would like to be able to run my own custom programs as a CRA (some way to bypass internal programming).
• Sites note that they are limited in pulling tables (with specific information ) based on internal programming. I only see what DM has allowed with the CVS/EXCEL tables.
• Better user guide to assist with training.

Incentivized

We are satisfied from our experience with Zelta by Merative, the close collaboration we have with the Zelta team is also something we value. We plan to use Zelta for a long time

Incentivized

It is easy to use, it helps us to be more productive, work better with teams anywhere they are, especially during the pandemic it was really helpful, it is easier to find data, to organize data, improving our findings, reducing time significantly, and more importantly been able to help in better ways our patients.

Incentivized

available when needed

Incentivized

some audit reports are difficult to download and take time subject pdf also takes some time to download

Incentivized

Our organization has been using both Zelta and in-house applications. The main considerations on which one to use for a particular study is time to get the databases running, cost, and ease of use. For some studies, the time and cost of using Zelta are negative factors, and an in-house system is selected.

very efficient self training

Incentivized

again not sure about it, I wasn't part of our organization yet

Incentivized

Zelta is as good or better than Rave. I believe that Zelta has a more friendly user interface and is easier to navigate on the designer and Site side. CRF build and study build in general appears to be easier and Zelta can be used for almost any kind of clinical study that Rave can be used for.

Incentivized

• Improved productivity
• Improved transparency
• No longer having to use multiple trackers to manage key study details and metrics

Incentivized

• Time Saving - We could deliver a fully functional eCRF within the record time of 15 days.
• Cost Saving - Reduces the overall turn around time thus eventually helping stay within the budget.
• Prompt customer support team thus helping in before time resolution of issues.

Incentivized