Develop a self-service logic configuration tool that allowed non-technical study teams to create and manage complex clinical trial logic independently from their development team, accelerating the study setup process and reducing costs. 

The tool needed to be versatile to accommodate the unique requirements of a wide variety of clinical trials, yet intuitive for non-technical staff to use effectively without specialized coding knowledge. 

PROJECT ROLE

Led the end-to-end UX research and design for a Clinical Trial Management System.

Successfully navigated large-scale, complex platform use cases and requirements for diverse internal and external users, highly regulated industry, tight deadlines and a geographically distributed team.

Balanced complex business requirements, technical constraints and an emphasis on usability.

TASK

Timeframe

2025 - 2026

Client

JAEB Center for Health Research

Role

Sr. UX/ UI Designer

APPROACH & CONTRIBUTION

Led team through ambiguity & complexity

Translated complex document-based specifications into validated logic scenarios.

Partnered with stakeholders, users, Product Management and Engineering to align on requirements, solution and execution.

Led the concept development for the Logic Builder and accelerated the feedback loop by utilizing Miro boards, wireframes, AI-assisted interactive prototypes.

Influenced Product Strategy & Roadmap

Identified patterns and hidden complexities early.

Accelerated stakeholder sign-off by aligning the team on “how it works” (functional logic) before diving into “how it looks” (visual design).

Maximized user experience, design consistency and engineering efficiency

Improved the user experience by iterating and validating the desirability and feasibility of the solution.

Maximized existing component usage and achieved design consistency by exploring ideas and collaborating with engineering.

CONTEXT

The Need

The Jaeb Center for Health Research (JCHR) conducts multi-center clinical trials, provides safety monitoring and manages data for research projects. JCHR has an outdated Clinical Trial Management System (CTMS) that relies heavily on developer support and has inherited a lot of development and user experience debt throughout the years.

Desired Future

Create a custom, scalable, user-friendly platform to enable non-technical study teams to create and manage complex clinical trial setup logic independently from their development team, accelerating the study setup process and reducing costs. 

Key Features

  • Clinical trial self-service set-up

  • Form Builder

  • Visit Scheduler

  • Dynamic Menu Builder

  • Logic Builder

  • Patient Onboarding

  • Informed Consent Form Creation

  • Document Management

VISION & CHALLENGES

The Vision

Starting Point

Approved study specific, comprehensive logic requirements and specifications.

Conditional Logic Builder

  • Self-service tool for non-technical team

  • Conditional logic for visits schedules and form usage without coding

  • Versatile and flexible to be used for a variety of studies

The Goal

Render study, user and patient specific menu and interfaces to be used by clinical site users or study participants.

Challenges

Complexity

  • Complex subject matter

  • Highly regulated industry

  • Complex workflows

Ambiguity

  • Complex logic

  • Balance between flexibility and simplicity

  • Balance between versatility and standardization

CONDITIONAL LOGIC BUILDER - PROCESS & SOLUTION

Led team through ambiguity & complexity

Facilitated regular discovery sessions with stakeholders and users

Synthesized research and coordinated cross-functional team alignment

Explored scenarios and user needs holistically in the context of creating a dynamic menu by creating visits, creating forms, assigning logic to forms, assigning forms and orchestrating menu behavior subject to the participant’s data and status

Discovery workshop with stakeholders to understand the current process, key steps, dependencies and pain points.

Discovery workshop with stakeholders to capture high-level vision and dependencies.

Discovery session to capture key menu components, logic scenarios, desired outcomes for the JCHR team.

Concept & wireframes for visit creation, scheduling and management to be supported by logic defined in the Logic Builder.

Logic Audit & Framework

Distilled complex document-based specifications into validated logic scenarios.

Translated logic scenarios into conditional logic framework

Drove alignment between stakeholders and engineering through prototyping

Task Specifications Analysis - audit of multiple task specification documents for multiple studies to identify common logic scenarios and outliers.

System Logic Analysis - analysis of built-in system logic to be excluded from the scope of the conditional logic builder.

The detailed logic audit resulted in a list of common logic scenarios. Each scenario was deconstructed to explore the potential of a “Source - Operator - Value” framework for user defined logic.

Common logic scenarios organized into conditional logic patterns.

Maximizing user experience, design consistency and engineering efficiency

Explored multiple prototypes to improve the user experience

Created AI-assisted prototypes to facilitate user feedback and cross-functional team alignment

Influenced the roadmap by flagging complexities and helping prioritize the user experience

Concept discussion and assessment of the user experience and technical constraints. After the discussion, the team decided to move forward with the concept to explore ways to address the limitations of the framework.

AI assisted prototype helped bridge the gap between abstract concept and an actionable direction, validating logic scenarios and testing the desirability and feasibility of the solution.

Explorations:

  • Logic scenarios

  • Nested conditions

  • Placement of buttons

  • “Dynamic” vs. “Static” value options

Component exploration - Design system vs. custom components.

Final Figma prototype utilizing existing design system

PROJECT STATUS

Logic Builder development was planned in two phases:

  • Phase 1 — covering simple conditions that required static values - was successfully completed.

  • Phase 2 - covering more complex conditions and dynamic values (based on data calculations or data coming from the online forms) was planned for later in the year.