The eClinical Forum is releasing its 8th public version of the “eCF Requirements” which takes all of the requirements and guidance directions that pertain to electronic data and electronic systems that support clinical research, from FDA, EMA, PMDA, MNPA, MHRA, TFDA and ICH , and boils them down into 37 unique statements or "eCF Requirements".

The one file you will need to complete an assessment of your e-Source or e-File systems.

This guideline provides additional information to sponsors/CROs evaluating the use of eSRA forms for their organisation.

Comparison of V2025 to V2024 for both Form/S (eSource) and Form/F (eFile) and mapping to regulatory authority document statements

The eCF REG team puts out a yearly version of the "eCF Requirements" which many orgainizations use to check compliance of their systems against regulatory authority document statements. The previous versions have been requested in order to easily check the requirements that were in place in a particular year.

The eClinical Forum is releasing its 7th public version of the “eCF Requirements” which takes all of the requirements and guidance directions that pertain to electronic data and electronic systems that support clinical research, from FDA, EMA, PMDA, MNPA, MHRA and ICH , and boils them down into 37 unique statements or "eCF Requirements".

The eClinical Forum is happy to announce the Public release of the "eCF Requirements for Electronic Data for Regulated Clinical Trials PR2023"

ABOUT THE ECF REQUIREMENTS:  The eClinical Forum has produced a set of Requirements, which are based upon statements in regulatory documents that pertain to the design, development, implementation, and management of electronic systems that support clinical research data as well as those statements that pertain to the handling of data that will be used in a regulated clinical trial.  We have reviewed regulatory documents from the FDA, EMA, PMDA, NMPA, MHRA and ICH to produce this set of requirements. Each Requirement has as its basis one or more statements from one or more of these regulatory documents. The Requirements can be used to determine if systems, that source or manage data which will become part of a regulated clinical trial, are consistent with regulatory requirements and if systems and process that manage these data have the necessary features.

The Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Team is pleased to announce the public release of theirwhite paper titled "AI state-of-play around clinical research"

The white paper were written by a joint task force from the eClinical Forum and Eucrof.

The Archiving and Decommission Team is pleased to announce the public release of three white papers:

• "The Decommissioning of Computerised Systems Used in Clinical Trials" 
• "Nature of a Distributed Trial Master File ‐ Practical Aspects"
• "Data Formats Used in Clinical Trials"

These white papers were written by a joint task force from EUCROF and the eClinical Forum, with representatives from other industry associations including ECRIN, the ePRO consortium, Medicines for Europe and the RQA.

The intent of this document is to provide a framework for individuals’ risk‐based decisions and best practices for implementing solutions for investigators’ signature collection on data reported to sponsor.

The Regulatory Expert Group is happy to announce the release of the English translation of the JPMA EDC Management Sheet v2.00.  EDC Management Sheet is a tool by which Japan Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) ensures  the computerized system used in clinical trials comply with relevant regulations and guidelines.This is an unofficial translation and made public for anyone to use. Please be advised that the original Japanese version should be used for any disputes.

These comments are provided by a team with representatives from 13 eCF member companies and have been reviewed by the eClinical Forum members. Those on the team are from Sweden, UK, Switzerland, Belgium, Spain, Germany, Italy, United States, and Japan. They represent many hours of personal review/comment as well as 19 hours of team discussion. The larger eCF Membership had opportunity to review and comment as well.  The resulting submitted comments (59 pages) are a consensus of member opinion.