EENSEK · AI Workforcebuilt by It's Sorted
Open vacancy · ENSEK is hiring this

Clinical Research Associate (CRA)

Clinical trial monitor

Here's what AI can do for this role — and what still needs a human. Built straight from ENSEK's own job advert, running live on my_db.fisher_demo.clinical_trial_visits. Not a slide about AI. The job, getting done.

What the AI does

Every line on the left is lifted from ENSEK's actual job ad. If a card lacks a harvested JD line, it is omitted. On the right is the AI doing it — with eligible cards running live against the warehouse and offline inspection clearly labelled in the workspace.

Their job ad asks

“site enrolment vs target — completion velocity by site and study, used to trigger enhanced monitoring or site escalation.”

AI delivers, live

How is site enrolment progressing across studies — which sites are tracking to target and which are lagging the completion velocity?

bar chart
Their job ad asks

“protocol deviation rate by site and category — the GCP monitoring heat map the CRA uses to target corrective action visits.”

AI delivers, live

Where is the protocol deviation rate highest by site and category — the CRA monitoring heat map for targeted follow-up?

table
Their job ad asks

“outstanding data queries by site — source data verification gap before database lock. ALCOA+ compliance signal.”

AI delivers, live

Which sites have the highest outstanding data query counts — the source data verification gap that needs CRA follow-up before database lock?

table
Their job ad asks

“visit completion rate by visit type — dropout and missed-visit pattern across the trial schedule. GCP protocol compliance signal.”

AI delivers, live

How does visit completion rate vary by visit type — where do dropout and missed-visit patterns cluster across the trial schedule?

bar chart
Their job ad asks

“critical deviation trend by month — safety signal watch for CRA and sponsor escalation under ICH E6 (R2) mandatory reporting.”

AI delivers, live

How is the critical deviation rate trending by month — are safety signals improving or escalating across the monitoring period?

table

What stays human

The honest other half. AI does the analysis; a person owns the decision — especially where regulation, fairness and accountability bite.

How it works

Ask in English

A plain-English question — the same one the job ad describes — is translated to SQL by the agentic backend.

LIVE — computed now against 27.6M rows

Curated cards run server-side against MotherDuck when eligible. The workspace separately labels any local inspection path.

Real data, live

Runs against my_db.fisher_demo.clinical_trial_visits. No synthetic numbers.

Self-falsifying

Each figure carries a falsifier — recomputed from the result set, not a stored number, so it can't quietly drift.

Where it plugs in

Function / Ignition surface: Enrolment · Protocol deviations · Data quality · Visit compliance · Safety signal. Grounded in the real ENSEK: Ignition — a real-time, event-driven meter-to-cash SaaS platform for energy suppliers · 7M+ accounts · regulated by Ofgem.

Watch it do the job — for real

It's the role getting done: curated questions run live server-side against the warehouse; local inspection is labelled inside the workspace.

Open the live workspace →

Provenance. Offline path: SYNTHESISED labelled 2,000-row clinical trial monitoring dataset (ITS-169, seed 20260613). Schema mirrors my_db.fisher_demo.clinical_trial_visits. ICH E6 (R2) GCP framework; MHRA inspection readiness context. NOT real trial data. Live path (dormant): server-side MotherDuck query against fisher_demo.clinical_trial_visits.

It's Sorted — I took ENSEK's job ads and didn't write a report on what AI could do. I built it. Get the rest sorted →