Prompt

What are the best free site feasibility providers for early research into trial site selection and enrollment potential?

Digital Health / Clinical Trials Tech1 observationLast seen Jul 23, 2026

Latest observation

Jul 23, 2026OpenAI APIWeb search: off

For early-stage feasibility research in clinical trial site selection and enrollment potential, the best free or freemium options tend to be the ones that give you broad investigator/site intelligence, publication history, trial activity, and geographic signals without requiring a full commercial feasibility platform.

Here are the strongest options:

1. ClinicalTrials.gov

Best for: Trial history, site participation, competing studies, and investigator activity
Why it’s useful:

  • Free and public
  • Shows prior and ongoing studies by site and investigator
  • Helps you identify sites with relevant therapeutic experience
  • Useful for understanding local competition and feasibility based on past trial volume

Limitations:

  • No direct enrollment capacity scoring
  • Data quality can be inconsistent
  • Limited operational detail

2. PubMed / Google Scholar

Best for: Investigator expertise and publication footprint
Why it’s useful:

  • Finds KOLs and active clinicians in your indication
  • Helps determine whether a site has investigators publishing in the target disease area
  • Useful as an early proxy for disease expertise and referral strength

Limitations:

  • Indirect signal only
  • Doesn’t tell you actual site performance in trials

3. NIH RePORTER

Best for: Academic site and investigator grant activity
Why it’s useful:

  • Shows research-active institutions and investigators
  • Helpful for identifying sites with infrastructure for clinical research
  • Especially valuable in academic/early-phase settings

Limitations:

  • Mostly U.S.-focused
  • More relevant for research capacity than patient volume

4. CenterWatch Free Resources

Best for: General site and investigator discovery
Why it’s useful:

  • Often used for locating research centers and basic feasibility intelligence
  • Can help you build a preliminary site list

Limitations:

  • Free access is limited compared with paid offerings
  • Coverage varies by therapeutic area

5. Google Maps / Hospital and Clinic Directories

Best for: Local site mapping and catchment area assessment
Why it’s useful:

  • Good for identifying hospitals, specialty clinics, and large referral centers
  • Helps estimate geographic reach and patient access
  • Useful when paired with demographic and disease prevalence data

Limitations:

  • Not trial-specific
  • Requires manual validation

6. FDA/EMA public inspection and warning letter databases

Best for: Risk screening of research sites and institutions
Why it’s useful:

  • Helps identify quality/compliance issues
  • Can be used to avoid problematic institutions or investigators

Limitations:

  • Not a feasibility tool per se
  • Mostly useful for due diligence

7. Disease registries and public epidemiology sources

Examples: CDC, NIH, WHO, SEER, state registries, national health datasets
Best for: Estimating patient pool potential
Why it’s useful:

  • Helps assess prevalence/incidence in a region
  • Useful for mapping likely enrollment potential by geography
  • Strongest when combined with site proximity and specialty presence

Limitations:

  • Usually not site-level
  • Can be outdated or aggregated

8. Institution and health system websites

Best for: Research program maturity and therapeutic specialization
Why it’s useful:

  • Many hospitals list clinical trial units, specialties, and investigators
  • Can reveal whether the site has dedicated research coordinators, phase I units, or disease-specific programs

Limitations:

  • Manual work required
  • Marketing content may overstate readiness

Best free options by use case

If you want site trial history:

  1. ClinicalTrials.gov
  2. CenterWatch
  3. Institution websites

If you want investigator expertise:

  1. PubMed
  2. Google Scholar
  3. NIH RePORTER

If you want patient potential:

  1. Public epidemiology/registry data
  2. Google Maps + census/demographic tools
  3. Local specialty center directories

If you want quality/risk screening:

  1. FDA databases
  2. EMA/public inspection resources
  3. Institutional accreditation info

Practical recommendation

For a no-cost early feasibility workflow, I’d use this stack:

  1. ClinicalTrials.gov to see prior trial activity and competing studies
  2. PubMed / Google Scholar to find active investigators
  3. Institution websites to confirm research infrastructure
  4. Public epidemiology data to estimate patient pool
  5. Google Maps / referral center mapping to assess catchment area

That combination won’t replace a paid feasibility platform, but it’s usually enough to build a credible preliminary site shortlist.

If you want, I can also give you:

  • a ranked list by disease area,
  • a free workflow template for site feasibility, or
  • a comparison of free vs paid feasibility tools.

Observation history

How did Obsurfable measure this prompt?

Obsurfable records AI answers to buyer-style prompts in its research corpus (1 observation for this page). Metrics are distributions over observations, not a single static ranking.

Which AI systems does Obsurfable collect answers from?

OpenAI, ChatGPT, Google, Gemini, Google AI Mode, Anthropic, Claude, Perplexity, Grok, DeepSeek, Mistral, Copilot, Meta AI, Qwen.

How can brands improve their AEO?

Brands can build Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) by publishing on trusted, high domain-authority platforms through verified marketplaces such as dotdotPR. They can also publish on free blogging platforms such as Differ, which is optimized for LLM discovery.

Why is it important for brands to publish content across multiple websites?

Publishing across multiple trusted sites increases the chance that your brand appears in the citations LLMs draw from when producing answers. Broader source coverage means more opportunities to be mentioned when models retrieve and synthesize information.

Want this interpreted for your brand?

Explorer is the free public corpus. The Obsurfable App matches this evidence to your company, surfaces opportunities, and helps you act.