Table 1.

Study feasibility assessment criteria

Study element	Importance for feasibility assessment
Study and/or protocol synopsis	Sufficient detail is necessary to determine the research activity sites are likely to perform, and what resources and qualified personnel are needed
Site budget	Draft budgets are acceptable, but sufficient detail must be included to indicate research expenses at the sites will be covered
Research question, impact, and importance of the study	Studies must align with clinical priorities at network sites
Cohort phenotype, total number of patients, and expected recruitment rate	Inclusion and exclusion criteria, ICD-10 codes, or other descriptions are necessary to determine if sites have sufficient patients and whether recruitment can be accomplished
Deadlines for submission of study documentation	Data analysts, providers, and other clinical personnel need sufficient time to complete activities preparatory to research (e.g., electronic health record data extrapolation, completion of site surveys)
Likelihood of site selection	Time to provide study feedback and documentation is not funded, so sites must justify this investment and have a reasonable likelihood of being selected for a study
Likelihood of funding	Sites with limited capacity for research are not typically resourced to absorb costs associated with unfunded studies, so priority is given to studies with or having a higher likelihood of funding (e.g., grants that have received fundable scores)
The “Ask”- what does the principal investigator need from prospective sites	List of required items from sites (e.g., protocol feedback, letter of support, site survey, subcontract materials)

ICD-10, International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision.