Background Recruitment remains a major barrier to timely clinical trial completion. Trialshub is an LLM-powered, chat-based platform intended to help users identify relevant trials and connect with coordinators to streamline recruitment workflows.

Objective To evaluate the perceived usability and operational value of Trialshub, and identify implementation considerations for real-world deployment.

Methods A usability test was conducted at Morehouse School of Medicine for the Trialshub application. Purposively selected participants included clinical research coordinators and individuals with and without clinical trial search experience. Participants completed a pre-test survey assessing demographics, digital health information behaviors, and familiarity with AI tools, followed by a moderated usability session using a Trialshub prototype. Users completed scenario-based tasks (locating a breast cancer trial, reviewing results, and initiating coordinator contact) using a think-aloud protocol. Task ratings, screen recordings, and transcribed feedback were analyzed descriptively and thematically, and reported.

Results Participants reported high comfort with using digital tools and moderate-to-high familiarity with AI. Trialshub’s chat-first design, guided prompts, and checklist-style eligibility display were perceived as intuitive and reduced cognitive load. Fast access to trials and the coordinator-contact workflow were viewed positively. Key usability issues included uncertainty at step transitions, insufficient cues for selecting results and next actions, and inconsistent system reliability (loading delays, errors, and broken trial detail pages). Participants also noted redundant questioning due to limited conversational memory, requested improved filtering/sorting, and clearer calls-to-action. All participants indicated that Trialshub has strong potential to meaningfully improve clinical trial processes.

Conclusions Trialshub shows promise for improving trial discovery and recruitment workflows, with identified design implications for real-world deployment.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

This study did not receive any funding

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Morehouse School of Medicine Institutional Review Board (IRB #2283200-1)

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

pblanksonmsm.edu

Shakirahusoutlook.com

ferdoseigmail.com

gtrevillionmsm.edu

aaslammsm.edu

aafanimsm.edu

pdunlapstanford.edu

jchepko1jh.edu

paoloikiru.ai

myidrismsm.edu

All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors