A shared sheet is the fastest way to start collecting data, and the hardest to defend later. Capture gives academic PIs, early biotechs and field researchers an audit trail, e-signatures and access control without setup fees.
Free sandbox · No credit card · 21 CFR Part 11 aligned
Tests
5
Hands-on
4
To confirm
1
Capture vs Google Sheets: the short version
0
sales calls needed to start building
1
audit trail across EDC, ePRO, eConsent and randomization
Free
sandbox with every feature, no time limit
EU + US
hosting in Frankfurt or N. Virginia
The wedge
Teams rarely choose a spreadsheet for a study on purpose. A pilot starts with three people and one file; a field team needs to enter data from a clinic with patchy connectivity and a sheet is what everyone already has; a PI wants something running by Monday. The file works until someone asks the questions an ethics committee, a sponsor or an inspector asks: who entered this value, who changed it and why, who could see participant names, and how do you know this is the version that was analysed.
Those questions are hard to answer from a sheet. Version history shows that a cell changed, not why, and it is not an attributable, append-only record of each field. Sharing is usually by link or by group, so access is rarely limited to the minimum necessary. Formulas and conditional formatting can flag unusual values, but nothing forces a correction or records a query and its resolution. See ALCOA+ data integrity for the principles a study database is judged against.
An EDC answers them by design. Capture records every change at field level with user, time, old value, new value and reason, keeps the audit trail exportable, and does not let it be edited from the interface. For the full list of controls, see 21 CFR Part 11 compliant EDC.
The recurring problems are mundane: a range sorted without its neighbouring columns so values attach to the wrong participant, a formula overwritten by a typed number, one participant entered twice under slightly different IDs, dates typed in several formats, a copy emailed to a statistician that then diverges from the master, and a name column that was supposed to be hidden but was not. None needs bad intent, and most go undetected until analysis. Paper CRF to eCRF conversion walks through how field types, ranges and required fields remove them.
What to compare
| Criterion | Why it matters | Capture |
|---|---|---|
| Audit trail | Who changed what, when and why | Field-level, append-only, with user, time, old and new value and reason |
| Access control | Minimum necessary access by role | Role-based access; site coordinators see names, researchers see coded IDs; site-level separation |
| Data checks | Clean data at entry | Range and custom-value edit checks raise auto-queries |
| Signatures | Consent and investigator sign-off | Verified eConsent; re-authenticated investigator signatures |
| Locked structure | Columns that cannot drift mid-study | Draft and approved forms; approved forms locked for live use |
| Participant numbering | No duplicates, no collisions across sites | Site-level participant numbering, for example 001-0042; QR enrollment with no app install |
| Scheduling | Repeat visits and diaries | Visit anchors, windows and reminders by email or SMS |
| Cost | Budget for small studies | Free sandbox; no setup fee; pay only when you go live |
This table shows Capture's answers only. Ask Google Sheets for theirs, and confirm current capabilities and terms directly with them.
Compliance controls
Every change is written to an append-only, hash-chained audit trail with user, time, old and new value and reason. Electronic signatures require password re-authentication and carry a meaning statement. Roles separate sites, and identifying data is segregated from study data at the database layer.
Weight changed 68.0 to 68.5 kg
Site coordinator · Reason: Transcription error
Query Q-0014 answered on Weight
Site coordinator · Reason: Source checked
Vital signs form locked
Data manager · Reason: Visit cleaned
Longitudinal studies
Each visit is anchored to screening, a milestone, an earlier visit, a fixed study day or a date recorded on a form, with a window and an enforcement mode. Questionnaires follow the schedule, reminders go out by email or SMS, and the status overview shows every participant against every visit.
Window -3 / +3 days around the anchored target date
Soft window
Stays available with a protocol deviation flag
Hard window
Locks outside the window
Warning only
Stays available with a warning
Auto-close
Marked missed when the window closes
Describe it or upload it, and let the AI draft the questions in the free sandbox.
Fit
A shared sheet is often fine for a short internal exercise: a feasibility count, a site contact list, a supply tracker or a brainstorm of variables before you design the form. Nothing identifiable or decision-relevant should depend on it.
Capture fits the moment the data will be relied on by someone else: a thesis committee, an ethics board, a sponsor, a journal or a regulator. It is also the right place for data collected in the field by several people, because roles and site separation are built in.
Identity and access
Site coordinators see participant names; researchers and sponsor-side users work with coded IDs. Identifying data is segregated at the database layer, sites see only their own participants, and data is encrypted with AES-256 at rest and TLS in transit, hosted in the EU or US.
Site coordinator
Jane Peterson
DOB: 04-Mar-1978
Subject 01-004
Sees direct identifiersResearcher
Subject 01-004
DOB: withheld
Coded ID only
Sees coded ID onlySame record, two roles. Row-level security enforces the split.
Switching
Paste your column headers or a data dictionary into Capture and the AI drafts the forms for your review; nothing is saved until you approve it. Then add types, ranges, required fields and edit checks, and attach each form to a visit.
Archive the sheet in read-only form, note the date new collection starts in Capture, and document how any earlier data will be handled at analysis. Do not edit the archived sheet afterwards.
Test the full flow in the free sandbox with sample data first: entry, a failed edit check, a query, an e-signature and the audit trail export. You pay only when you go live with real participants.
Evaluation
Agreements, access control and hosting checked.
Schedules, windows and reminders needed.
Audit trail with reasons required.
Consent or investigator sign-off needed.
Site separation and roles needed.
Part 11 or GCP expectations apply.
All comparisons
Every comparison uses the same approach: what to test, where each option fits, and Capture's own answers. See all of them on the comparisons hub at /compare.
It can store the numbers, but trial data also needs an attributable field-level audit trail with reasons for change, controlled access, edit checks and signatures. Check each against your regulator's and sponsor's expectations before relying on a sheet.
Part 11 compliance depends on the system and on how the sponsor validates and uses it. A general-purpose spreadsheet lacks several of the controls Part 11 describes, such as signatures with meaning statements and a field-level audit trail with reasons, unless you build them around it.
Version history shows that a file or cell changed. A trial audit trail records, for every field, who changed it, when, the old and new value and the reason, and cannot be edited from the interface. Capture records all of these.
Upload your column headers or data dictionary, or describe the form, and the AI drafts it for review. Add checks and a visit schedule, test in the free sandbox, and archive the sheet with a documented cut-over date.
Yes. Capture uses site-level participant numbering and roles, and QR-code enrollment needs no app install, so multiple sites or field teams can enter data without sharing one file.
The sandbox is free with every feature and no credit card. There is no setup fee, and you pay only once you go live with real participants.
Yes. The free sandbox includes every feature with sample data, no credit card and no time limit. You pay only when you go live.
From public positioning and the criteria teams tell us matter. We state only Capture's own capabilities as fact; confirm Google Sheets's current offering with them.
Keep exploring
Capture vs Excel
The same question for Excel.
Google Forms for clinical research
The form-based version.
Audit trail software for clinical trials
What a proper audit trail records.
EDC for investigator-initiated trials
For academic PIs.
Capture vs Qualtrics
Survey and experience platform.
Capture vs SurveyMonkey
Online survey tool.
Build a study in minutes. Free sandbox.