Zelta is a cloud-based unified clinical data management and acquisition platform with customizable modules, that can be tailored to the meet the needs of clinical trials and accelerate outcomes.
N/A
Typeform
Score8.1 out of 10
N/A
Typeform is online form and survey software, focused on high-quality visuals and user experience. Users can create surveys, registration forms, tests & quizzes, contests, tutorials, shopping carts, and contact forms, without needing to write code. Typeform offers freemium plan pricing. Their basic plan is free for one user; their Pro plan in $35/month for one user (includes logic jump, respondent notifications, calculator, custom thank you screen, hidden fields, payment fields, and 2GB file…
$30
*Per Month
Pricing
Zelta
Typeform
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Essentials
$30
*Per Month
Professional
$35
*Per Month
Premium
$59
*Per Month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Zelta
Typeform
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Yes
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
Optional
No setup fee
Additional Details
Subscription - For larger organizations and those who need a predictable budget. Most modules included without incurring additional fees. Eligible for volume discounts.
Pay per use - For organizations that need flexibility without a long term contractual commitment. Transparent a la carte pricing, no minimums. Fees start when trial goes live.
Zelta is a good tool for companies currently utilizing multiple software platforms to create and monitor clinical trial information. Due to the price, it is best suited for large pharmaceutical manufacturers with active pipelines and high R&D spend. Zelta's value is more limited to smaller, more focused companies.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Typeform is definitely a leader in the online survey space and that's for a reason. Between logic mapping and the ease of use for the end user, it's a solid app. The unfortunate thing, however, is the price tag--particularly considering the protection you receive from bots. Typeform only allows a certain number of responses at certain package levels, ie: the lowest level, you get a very limited number of responses but in order to receive more responses before your survey is locked, you must upgrade. This is what ultimately lead us to cancel with them. When you post a survey on Typeform, that survey is automatically posted publicly on their website--making it widely available to bots. Typeform offers no easy form of protection like a standardized captcha that you can add to the survey in order to filter bots out. Instead, there are several "work arounds" that they advise users to do that have very limited degrees of success. A quick online search shows that Typeform knows this is clearly an issue, yet they have yet to build in a bot-prevention feature. Since their plan prices vary by number of responses, it seems that they have no incentive to limit the amount of bots filling out surveys I believe. Ultimately, we canceled because, although the app is powerful, it just seemed like their business practices were unethical in my opinion.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
We cannot have multiple study accesses for a study in the studies supported by Zelta. eg. Coder and Data manager.
Though all the study-build related errors are flagged on the study-build page, some errors like incorrect dynamics applied, which eventually affects the subject PDF extraction, reports, etc.
When the study is imported from another Zelta studies, certain attributes remain running in the background even if it seems to be disabled.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
The pricing structure is a little steep, especially for the Pro+ plan. It would be nice if they had an a la carte option because there are some features we are paying for that we will never use.
When creating forms, sometimes the cursor will inexplicably leave the field you are typing in and leave you with incomplete sentences.
Even though we are paying for our use, we still have the Typeform branding on our forms, which I think should be removed once you upgrade from the basic plan.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
We are satisfied from our experience with Zelta by Merative, the close collaboration we have with the Zelta team is also something we value. We plan to use Zelta for a long time
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Zelta has many different functionalities as well as modules that can be used depending on what the sponsor wants. I like that they are optional so that when building a study, you can give the sponsor options if they want them or not. Many of the optional models I like to use (Training Tracking for example) as they make tracking Site training so much easier than sending training forms out.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Typeform takes a little bit of getting used to. Compared to Google Forms there are a lot more parts to the software and customizing the form isn't as intuitive. I have also found that embedding it into one smaller section of a webpage seamlessly can be a little tricky. But everything can be figured out eventually and the analytics are very good.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Our organization has been using both Zelta and in-house applications. The main considerations on which one to use for a particular study is time to get the databases running, cost, and ease of use. For some studies, the time and cost of using Zelta are negative factors, and an in-house system is selected.
I haven't used the support portion of Typeform, as everything was quite easy to use. I have never encountered a situation where I did not know what to do or how to fix something myself. Typeform is very easy to adopt within any organization, no matter if you understand tech or not.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
It was easier to understand the usability of the software [Zelta]. For our engineers [it] was easier to migrate our data, and fully set up everything. We found out that comparing other software[s], this one is safe, easy to use, has more functionalities, [and it's] easier to work with team members everywhere making clinical trials more efficient.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
When looking for a feature rich & flexible / customizable solution, Typeform beats out everyone. However, for specific use cases (like NPS), AskNicely is a clear winner in terms of features, but is much too expensive. Typeform is also fun to use, especially compared to Wufoo which seems so out of date
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Typeform has helped guide our Customer Success, Product, and Marketing teams in strategizing how to engage with customers better, and it has also given us a quick and easy way to do so! By collecting feedback and being able to share it across internal teams, we can coordinate our efforts to build our customers a better tool.
Typeform has proved to be an elegant solution to one of our earlier vexing problems (previous survey tools that looked annoying, had extremely limited branding options/were not customizable, and didn't integrate well with the rest of our tool set) while not breaking the bank for us - it's a very reasonable price point and does WAY more than the previous tools we were paying just as much for.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
