Value Proposition for Healthcare Partners: Enhancing TriNetX Platform Differentiation and Adoption

This generative research initiative focused on uncovering how TriNetX’s healthcare organization (HCO) partners perceive and engage with the platform, with an emphasis on identifying value-driving features and barriers to adoption—particularly regarding the underutilized “Linked” functionality.

Through in-depth qualitative research with HCO stakeholders, we explored the end-to-end experience of using the platform, from identifying clinical trial opportunities to managing data workflows. Our research surfaced core platform strengths as well as unmet needs and systemic pain points that hinder usage and differentiation in a competitive market.

Research Objectives

  1. Discover areas where the platform currently delivers value for its HCO (healthcare organizations) partners.

  2. Identify gaps in the platform and opportunities to provide more differentiated value.

  3. Identify the reasons for low adoption rate of the new “Linked” functionality

Timeline

3 Months

Research Activities

Project Scoping, User Interviews, Competitor Analysis, and Ideation

Team

UX Researcher (Me)

Product Manager

Research & Strategy Director

Research Process

Immersion

TriNetX is a global network of healthcare organizations and pharmaceutical companies driving real-world research to accelerate the development of new medicines.

Competitor Analysis

Identified competitors in the market to compare and contrast the different capabilities provided by TriNetX.

While TrinetX was leading in a variety of therapeutic areas, the most evident gap was in clinical decision support, which most of its rivals already provided, presenting an opportunity for them to expand into.

Key Insights

Communication gaps create challenges to quantify and attribute impact

  • Trial feasibility decision makers are disconnected from the platform, resulting in a broken feedback loop

  • Communication is often disrupted due to lack of sponsor response

  • Lack of opportunity tracking means no way to follow opportunity outcomes

For research and analysis, HCOs are reluctant to invest in additional data access without transparency

  • Data sharing remains a concern due to legal and privacy challenges

  • Data visibility by sponsors is a major concern for some research focused users

The platform is not intuitive, creating a barrier to entry for more engagement

  • HCOs do not have enough resources to train new users

  • Features and navigation within the platform are not obvious, difficult for users to learn on their own, decreasing platform engagement

Accessing linked data sets is not a priority; additional data sets may be more attractive

Many alternative claims and mortality data sources exist

  • Other 3rd party data types are in high demand however

Data handling complexities result in a cumbersome experience

  • Data ingestion is complex and time-consuming for some

  • Analytics capabilities are limited forcing HCOs out of the platform to leverage additional tools

  • Exporting data is time-consuming, requiring extra steps and manual tasks to format

Ideation Session

Using ideation framework to think divergently, we rapidly generated wide-ranging ideas for every pain point. All the ideas were further clustered for similarity and brainstormed for details. We assessed all ideas for feasibility and mapped them in a 2x2 matrix to prioritize ideas based on impacts vs alignment with the roadmap. This helped us in finalizing a set of recommendations to improve TriNetX value proposition.

Workshop Participants -

  • UX Researchers

  • Product Managers (2)

  • Director of Product Development

  • Senior Vice President

Prioritized Recommendations

To improve the product and enhance the users experience, I provided strategic, actionable insights based on the research findings that address the research objectives.

By implementing these recommendations, TriNetX would -

  • Help demonstrate ROI to users

  • Help improve opportunity-to-site matching which benefits sponsors and HCOs

  • Reduces HCO burden to drive adoption and usage of platform

  • Expands Linked feature use cases and value to HCOs

  • Adds hard-to-obtain but highly desired data sets

  • Help users do common tasks easily

Key Takeaways

Aha Moments

Even when a claim appears unjustified to users, the complexity of the appeal process often leads members to pay the disputed amount instead of contesting it.

Some users still prefer using paper methods for making payments rather than adopting technology.

The lack of transparency in the claims process creates significant anxiety among members, with some waiting over a year to receive their claims.

Positives

Regular weekly check-ins and an engaging approach ensured team buy-in and active participation.

Collaboration with UX Designers ensured that research insights and recommendations were actionable and relevant.

Challenges

Misalignment within the team about the need to recruit more current users of Medical Mutual

Teams need constant education about each phase of the research process to ensure everyone understands the objectives and methodologies

Previous
Previous

Redesigning the Medical Claims Experience: Enabling Clarity, Confidence, and Control for Members

Next
Next

Demystifying Credit Choices: Improving Transparency and Engagement in CFNA’s Credit Card and Rewards