When brands seek evidence for their health products, they often face a choice: pursue traditional clinical trials or leverage real-world data. Understanding the strengths and limitations of each approach is crucial for making informed decisions.
Clinical trials are prospective studies with controlled conditions, randomization, and often placebo groups. They're designed to establish causation and are required for pharmaceutical drug approval.
Real-world data comes from observing product performance in natural settings—through wearables, surveys, electronic health records, and direct consumer feedback.
FDA requires clinical trials for any product making therapeutic drug claims. No alternative pathway exists.
When you need to prove your product directly causes an outcome, controlled trials provide the strongest evidence.
Some regulatory pathways specifically require randomized controlled trial data.
When safety concerns are paramount, the controlled environment of clinical trials offers maximum oversight.
Supplements, wellness devices, and lifestyle products often benefit more from real-world evidence that shows how they perform in daily use.
Structure/function claims for supplements can be supported by real-world evidence without the cost and complexity of clinical trials.
RWD studies can capture broader, more representative participant groups than traditional trials, which often have strict inclusion criteria.
RWD studies can be completed in weeks rather than months, getting evidence into marketing materials faster.
The most sophisticated brands don't choose between RWD and clinical trials—they use both strategically. Real-world data can inform clinical trial design, identify promising outcomes to study, and provide ongoing evidence after trials conclude.
At Reputable Health, we help brands determine which approach best fits their goals, regulatory requirements, and timeline. For most consumer health products, a well-designed real-world evidence program delivers the most value.