5 Key Questions to Ask When Evaluating RBQM Platforms (ICH E6(R3)-Ready)

Learn the 5 essential evaluation questions when comparing RBQM systems. Ensure transparency, traceability, collaboration, and E6(R3) compliance.

5 Key Questions to Ask When Evaluating RBQM Platforms (ICH E6(R3)-Ready)

Learn the 5 essential evaluation questions when comparing RBQM systems. Ensure transparency, traceability, collaboration, and E6(R3) compliance.
Cyntegrity logo – Risk-Based Quality Management Solutions

5 Questions to Ask When Comparing RBQM Platforms

Choosing the right Risk-Based Quality Management (RBQM) platform is now a critical decision for sponsors and CROs, especially as ICH E6(R3) emphasizes proportionate, data-driven, and traceable oversight.
The right system should not only monitor risk — but enable teams to understand, anticipate, and act on it.

 

Below are five essential evaluation questions, and how the MyRBQM® Portal addresses each one.

1

Does the platform provide clear, historical data transparency?

Look for:

  • Versioned datasets

  • The ability to see what was known when

  • Decision traceability over time

 

How MyRBQM® Helps:
Every data point is time-versioned, allowing teams to review historical study states, compare iterations, and understand how decisions evolved.

Example: View site performance trends across weeks or quarters — not just snapshots.

2

Is every data point verifiable and traceable in context?

A compliant RBQM system must support source traceability, ensuring you can justify decisions during audits or regulatory review.

 

How MyRBQM® Helps:
Each value carries three timestamps:

  1. When the data was originally recorded

  2. When it entered the system

  3. When it was used in analysis

 

This means no ambiguity and no gaps in the decision context.

3

Does the system support full auditability of data transformations?

Risk decisions must be explainable. Regulators are increasingly expecting teams to demonstrate not only what changed, but also why.

 

How MyRBQM® Helps:
All transformations — from source refresh to derived metrics — are logged and reproducible.
You can re-run analyses exactly as they were, even months later.

This supports clean inspection narratives and smooth regulator interaction.

5

Can the system handle continuous data flow reliably?

Clinical programs generate large, evolving data streams. Your RBQM system must perform reliably under load — not just in static report mode.

 

How MyRBQM® Helps:
The platform is designed for high-volume, continuous ETL and analysis, featuring efficient query execution and resilient processing pipelines.

This ensures stable performance — even at scale, across global portfolios.

4

Can teams collaborate in real time without version conflicts?

RBQM is cross-functional, encompassing Medical, Operations, Data, QA, and Vendors.
Systems must reflect this reality.

 

How MyRBQM® Helps:
Stakeholders can work simultaneously with shared visibility and role-based permissions, ensuring alignment and eliminating duplicated review cycles.

Final Thought

Selecting an RBQM platform is not just a technology decision — it affects your inspection readiness, operational efficiency, and patient safety outcomes.

A system designed for transparency, verifiability, auditability, collaboration, and performance allows sponsors and CROs to manage study risk with confidence.

That is the foundation of the MyRBQM® Portal — and why it remains the trusted choice for BioPharma organizations scaling modern clinical research portfolio complexity.

Not all RBQM is truly traceable.
Most platforms monitor risk — very few explain why decisions were made.
Regulators care about the decision trail, not the dashboard.

Not all RBQM is truly traceable.
Most platforms monitor risk — very few explain why decisions were made.
Regulators care about the decision trail, not the dashboard.

Compare RBQM Systems with Long-Term Perspective

Selecting an RBQM system is not just about current dashboards—it is about whether decisions remain explainable months or years later. This short paper explores why historical context, traceability, and longitudinal auditability matter when comparing RBQM platforms, and how expert systems differ from rule-based tools.

Stay Informed with Us

Risk-based quality management in 2026

Risk-based quality management in 2026: how ICH E6(R3) defines RBQM, where practice diverges, and what regulators now expect in clinical trials....
Diagram illustrating the FDA Total Product Lifecycle (TPLC) management approach for AI and machine learning devices, showing a continuous cycle of design, validation, submission, monitoring, and update.

FDA AI Guidance 2025 Interactive Visualizer

Explore how FDA’s 2025 AI guidance shapes lifecycle oversight for AI-enabled medical software through interactive regulatory scenarios....

Media Inquiries

Need a quote, speaker, or more info about Cyntegrity? Reach out directly to our media contact for timely assistance.

Evaluating RBQM Platforms

Evaluating RBQM Platforms

Let’s Talk RBQM @ SCOPE Summit! Visit us at Booth #615

Cyntegrity logo – Risk-Based Quality Management Solutions
Picture of Artem Andrianov, PhD

Artem Andrianov, PhD

CEO & Founder

Picture of Dr. Johann Proeve

Dr. Johann Proeve

Chief Scientific Officer

Picture of David Lacagnina

David Lacagnina

Chief Business Officer

Picture of Sven Cohadzic

Sven Cohadzic

Project Manager