Softwr

Healthcare · head to head

OpenClinica vs Signant Health

OpenClinica logo

OpenClinica

Healthcare

Clinical trial EDC with a genuinely open source community edition alongside a quoted commercial platform

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Signant Health logo

Signant Health

Healthcare

eCOA-first clinical trial platform that has grown outward into EDC, eConsent and televisits

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: OpenClinica the free community edition is a different and older product line from the commercial platform, so evaluating the open source build tells you little about what the paid product actually does.; Signant Health no pricing is published, and the software licence is a minority of the real bill once instrument licensing, translations, device provisioning and services are added, so early budget estimates are routinely too low.
  • They diverge on capability: OpenClinica covers Open source community edition, Signant Health covers Unified platform.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which OpenClinica and Signant Health actually diverge.

Attributes where OpenClinica and Signant Health differ
AttributeOpenClinicaSignant Health
PlatformsWeb, Self-hosted, iOS, AndroidWeb, iOS, Android

Identical on both: starting price (On request), pricing model (quote), free tier (No), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Healthcare).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in OpenClinica

  • Open source community edition
  • Electronic data capture
  • Randomisation
  • EHR-to-EDC
  • Audit trail
  • Reporting and analytics

Only in Signant Health

  • Unified platform
  • Randomisation and supplies
  • TeleVisits
  • Rater training
  • Data surveillance
  • Instrument library

Both cover

  • eConsent
  • eCOA and ePRO

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

OpenClinica

  • An academic coordinating centre running investigator-initiated trials that needs Part 11 compliant capture without an enterprise eClinical budgetnot Signant Health
  • A registry or observational cohort study collecting structured data across many sites over yearsnot Signant Health
  • A small device sponsor that needs eConsent and ePRO in the same system as its case report formsnot Signant Health
  • An informatics group that wants to self-host the open source edition for a non-regulated internal studynot Signant Health

Signant Health

  • A central nervous system or psychiatry trial where the primary endpoint is a rated scale and rater consistency decides the readoutnot OpenClinica
  • A global study needing an outcome instrument translated and linguistically validated across a dozen languagesnot OpenClinica
  • A decentralised or hybrid protocol combining televisits, eConsent and at-home patient reported outcomesnot OpenClinica
  • A sponsor consolidating separate eCOA, eConsent and randomisation vendors onto one platform to cut reconciliation worknot OpenClinica

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

OpenClinica

  • The free community edition is a different and older product line from the commercial platform, so evaluating the open source build tells you little about what the paid product actually does.
  • The vendor provides no support or services at all for the community edition, which means outages, patching, database upgrades and validation documentation are entirely your problem.
  • Commercial pricing is not published, so you cannot benchmark it against alternatives without entering a sales process, and third-party figures around USD 1,000 a month are indicative rather than contractual.
  • Study build is skilled work: complex edit checks, randomisation schemes and integrations usually mean paying for vendor or consultant configuration services on top of the licence, which is a frequently underestimated line in the budget.
  • As a smaller vendor than the large eClinical suites it has a thinner partner and consultant ecosystem, so finding experienced build staff or a CRO already fluent in the platform is harder than with the market incumbents.

Signant Health

  • No pricing is published, and the software licence is a minority of the real bill once instrument licensing, translations, device provisioning and services are added, so early budget estimates are routinely too low.
  • Linguistic validation is charged per instrument per language and is on the critical path to first patient in, so adding a country late in start-up produces both a cost and a schedule hit.
  • Provisioned participant devices bring logistics, replacement, shipping and cellular connectivity obligations that persist for the life of the trial and are frequently underestimated.
  • The EDC component is newer than the eCOA heritage, so sponsors with complex data management requirements often keep an incumbent EDC and lose the single-database benefit that justifies the platform.
  • It is priced and scoped for sponsor-grade trials, which makes it a poor fit for investigator-initiated or academic studies that need outcome collection without the services layer.

Pricing, plan by plan

OpenClinica

On request
  • Community Edition$undefined/year
    • Free and open source under the LGPL
    • Self-hosted, on the older 3.x line
    • No vendor support or services of any kind
  • OpenClinica Enterprise$undefined/year
    • Pricing only through a sales process
    • Hosted and validated instance
    • EDC, eConsent, eCOA, randomisation and analytics modules

Signant Health

On request
  • SmartSignals Unified Platform$undefined/year
    • Priced per study through a sales process
    • Modules selected per protocol: EDC, eCOA, randomisation, eConsent, TeleVisits
    • Instrument licensing paid to scale owners on top of platform cost

Which should you pick?

Choose OpenClinica if

  • You need open source community edition.
  • You work on Web, Self-hosted, iOS, Android.
  • You also want electronic data capture.
OpenClinica review

Choose Signant Health if

  • You need unified platform.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want randomisation and supplies.
Signant Health review

Questions people ask

Is OpenClinica or Signant Health better?
Neither clearly leads. OpenClinica starts at On request and Signant Health at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, OpenClinica or Signant Health?
OpenClinica starts at On request and Signant Health at On request.
Does OpenClinica or Signant Health run on more platforms?
OpenClinica runs on Web, Self-hosted, iOS, Android. Signant Health runs on Web, iOS, Android.
What is OpenClinica best used for?
OpenClinica is most often used for an academic coordinating centre running investigator-initiated trials that needs part 11 compliant capture without an enterprise eclinical budget, a registry or observational cohort study collecting structured data across many sites over years, a small device sponsor that needs econsent and epro in the same system as its case report forms, an informatics group that wants to self-host the open source edition for a non-regulated internal study. Of those, an academic coordinating centre running investigator-initiated trials that needs part 11 compliant capture without an enterprise eclinical budget and a registry or observational cohort study collecting structured data across many sites over years are not what Signant Health is typically brought in for.
What can OpenClinica do that Signant Health cannot?
OpenClinica covers Open source community edition, Electronic data capture, Randomisation, EHR-to-EDC. Signant Health covers Unified platform, Randomisation and supplies, TeleVisits, Rater training. Both handle eConsent, eCOA and ePRO.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

OpenClinica: Is OpenClinica free?

There is a genuinely free, LGPL licensed community edition you host yourself with no vendor support. The commercial platform with eConsent, eCOA and a validated hosted instance is quoted and paid.

Signant Health: What is Signant best at?

Electronic clinical outcome assessment, particularly rated scales in central nervous system and psychiatry trials, together with rater training and endpoint quality services.

OpenClinica: Is the open source version still maintained?

Yes, releases on the 3.x line continued through 2025, but it is a separate and older architecture from the commercial product.

Signant Health: Is pricing published?

No. Everything is quoted per study, and instrument licences, translations and devices sit on top of the platform cost.

OpenClinica: Does it meet 21 CFR Part 11?

The commercial hosted platform is built for Part 11 and GCP compliance. If you self-host the community edition, compliance and validation are entirely your responsibility.

Signant Health: Can I use it only for eCOA?

Yes. The modules are selected per protocol, and many sponsors take eCOA and eConsent while keeping an existing EDC.

OpenClinica: What does the commercial version cost?

Not published. Third-party listings suggest enterprise arrangements from around USD 1,000 per month, but real cost depends on study count, subjects, modules and build services.

Signant Health: What drives the timeline?

Translation and linguistic validation of outcome instruments, which is per language per instrument and sits on the critical path to study start.

Share

Related pages

More on OpenClinica

More on Signant Health

Keep looking

Other head to heads