Glossary
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
The protocol rules that decide who can join a trial: inclusion criteria every participant must meet, and exclusion criteria any one of which rules a person out.
What does Inclusion and exclusion criteria mean in clinical research?
Federal regulations for ClinicalTrials.gov define eligibility criteria as a limited list of criteria for selecting human subjects to participate in a clinical trial, provided as inclusion and exclusion criteria.[1] Inclusion criteria describe who the study needs, such as diagnosis, disease stage, age or lab ranges. Exclusion criteria describe who must be left out, usually for safety or to keep the results interpretable.
Criteria also drive screen failure. In an audit of 15 randomized oncology studies at a cancer center in India, not meeting inclusion criteria was the most common reason, accounting for 54.9% of screen failures.[2] Protocols are also getting harder to match: Tufts CSDD benchmarks show Phase II and III protocols averaging more eligibility criteria than before.[3]
Practical note: before outreach, sort each criterion by where it can be settled:
- In the chart, such as diagnosis, stage, prior therapy and recent labs. Identify evaluates these and shows the evidence.
- On a short call, such as willingness to travel or current medications.
- Only at the screening visit, such as protocol-specific labs or imaging.
Sources
- 1.42 CFR 11.10 Definitions (Clinical Trials Registration and Results Information Submission) · eCFR (NIH/NLM), 2026
- 2.Audit of screen failure in 15 randomised studies from a low and middle-income country · ecancermedicalscience, via PubMed, 2022Single center (Tata Memorial Centre, India). Quote: "Out of these, 3,666 (49.0%) patients were enrolled into trials and 3,815 (51.0%) screen failed. The most common reason for screen failure was 'not meeting inclusion criteria' (54.9%) followed by declining to take treatment (22.2%)."
- 3.Protocol Design and Performance Benchmarks by Phase and by Oncology and Rare Disease Subgroups · Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science (Tufts CSDD), via PubMed, 2023Quote: "The results show a continuing upward trend across all protocol design variables. Phase II and III protocols average more endpoints, eligibility criteria, protocol pages; investigative sites; countries and datapoints collected."