Behind the Jingle: The Reality of Staffing GLP-1 Clinical Trials

A coffee chat with Tom Murn on what it takes to staff the next wave of clinical research.

If the jingle sounds familiar, so does the strain that comes with it. GLP-1 trials are everywhere—on your TV and in your timelines.

As sponsors expand these studies beyond weight loss into new indications and more complex protocols, sites are feeling the strain. The biggest pressure point? Staffing GLP-1 clinical trials at the speed and scale of today’s programs.

To unpack what’s changing and what high-performing programs are doing differently, we sat down for a “coffee chat” with Tom Murn, who oversees Medix’s clinical research division. No tunes stuck in our heads—just practical insights. So let’s dive in.

About Tom and His View from the Field

Q: For anyone who hasn’t met you yet, can you introduce yourself and what you do at Medix?

Tom Murn: I’ve been with Medix for about 3.5 years and help oversee our clinical research division and strategic partnerships across the industry. I work with organizations that are expanding, whether that’s opening new sites, entering new therapeutic areas, or ramping up complex trials, and helping them build the workforce needed to support that growth.

Setting the GLP-1 Reality

Q: From your seat in the field, what feels fundamentally different about GLP-1 trials today compared to even a year or two ago?

Tom: GLP-1 is the new hot word in clinical research. Five years ago, it was COVID vaccines and decentralized trials. Today, it’s GLP-1 and AI. Those are the two topics you hear at every conference and in pipeline conversations.

GLP-1 therapies have been around, but the focus has intensified because of how quickly the market is growing. There’s more investment, more competition, and a major push to find the next highly successful drug and scale it.

Q: People hear “GLP-1” and think weight loss—but operationally, what do these trials actually demand from sites?

Tom: There’s a lot more happening than weight loss alone. Sponsors are building trials with additional endpoints, including areas like PTSD, depression, and smoking or alcohol misuse, to better understand broader quality-of-life impacts.

That changes what sites need to execute. Organizations that once focused on GLP-1 weight-loss studies are now being asked to expand, open new locations, add satellite sites, or support trials in therapeutic areas they haven’t worked in before. Practically, that means higher enrollment goals, more complexity, and more demand for staffing models that can keep up.

Staffing as the Constraint

Tom detailed the shift in staffing expectations in his article, The Real Story Behind the GLP-1 Trial Boom.

Q: You recently wrote that staffing is becoming the hardest variable to control. Why is that proving true in real life?

Tom: People are always the hardest variable to control. The market has shifted since COVID. In many populated areas, talent exists, but the challenge is finding the right talent with the right skill set who will stay, perform, and align with the organization.

At the same time, more companies are expanding into research or launching research-naive sites. That requires experienced professionals who can guide teams, physicians, and processes from day one so sites can execute well and sponsors want to continue working with them.

Q: Which roles are creating the biggest bottlenecks right now—and why those roles specifically?

Tom: The most common bottlenecks we see are:

• Clinical research coordinators (CRC) and research assistants
• Principal investigators and subinvestigators
• Registered dietitians, especially in weight-loss-focused protocols

CRCs are a major pressure point because GLP-1 trials are more complex than many people expect. They often require patient education, diaries, lab work, detailed tracking, and phlebotomy skills for A1C and lipid monitoring. Strong documentation and adverse event reporting are also critical, and not every coordinator has experience with that level of complexity.

Q: What happens operationally when a site is understaffed on a GLP-1 study? Where do things start to break?

Tom: Enrollment breaks first.

If you don’t have the right physician oversight or staff to screen, randomize, and manage patient visits, you miss enrollment goals. Once that happens, timelines start slipping.

In real life, this can be triggered by turnover, leave, or sites being stretched across too many studies. When a gap hits, teams scramble. That’s where flexible staffing becomes critical, whether it’s short-term coverage or longer-term support if a role isn’t coming back.

Patient and Protocol Complexity

Q: How is real-world GLP-1 use changing patient recruitment, screening, and workload for site teams?

Tom: Protocols are becoming more complex and more specialized. Sponsors are exploring new endpoints and therapeutic areas, which often requires additional skill sets or entirely new roles.

Some studies need clinical research raters for assessments or access to specialists, depending on the endpoint. On the recruitment side, sites are doing more targeted data mining and patient identification. It’s no longer just tapping an existing population. It often requires more specialized recruitment strategies.

Q: Where has workload increased more than sponsors may realize?

Tom: Enrollment volume. Many phase 3 GLP-1 trials have aggressive enrollment targets. That means adding more sites, building more partnerships, and making sure each site has the infrastructure and staffing to execute at scale. Sponsors are investing heavily, so they need partners who can deliver.

What the Best Programs Are Doing Differently

Q: From what you’re seeing, what separates GLP-1 programs that stay on track from the ones that struggle?

Tom: It starts with partnerships, both at the sponsor and site level.

Strong programs work with organizations that have demonstrated performance. They can meet enrollment goals, have the right infrastructure and physician oversight, and can truly access the patient population they claim they can access.

Another key difference is having a scalable workforce. It’s impossible to predict everything, but programs that can scale quickly and stabilize when turnover happens are far more likely to stay on track.

Q: When it comes to staffing partnerships specifically, what should organizations be looking for?

Tom: Flexibility and foresight matter most right now. GLP-1 trials move fast, and it’s difficult to predict how enrollment, timelines, or site needs will shift.

The strongest partnerships help organizations understand the landscape before committing. That includes where talent is available, what compensation looks like in different markets, and how long it will realistically take to staff key roles. It also means having the ability to scale support during enrollment ramp-up or adjust quickly if plans change. Planning upfront is far more effective than trying to patch gaps later.

Looking Ahead

Q: For companies planning GLP-1 expansion into 2026 and beyond, what should they be doing now to avoid staffing issues later?

Tom: They need to be clear on what they can realistically deliver and where they have sustainable support.

That means understanding the local talent pool, compensation requirements, access to the right patient population, and how quickly they need to enroll their first patient. The biggest risk is securing an opportunity with a major sponsor and falling short because staffing and infrastructure weren’t planned early enough.

Q: Any predictions you’re watching closely?

Tom: I expect demand for registered dietitians to increase over the next 6–12 months, both in clinical trials and commercially. Over the last three to six months alone, I’ve received more requests for registered dietitians than I have in my entire career in staffing, and that demand shows no signs of slowing.

As GLP-1 treatments continue to expand, we may see a supply-demand imbalance. That could mean a shortage of available dietitians or a shift toward more flexible, gig-style engagements as organizations compete for the same talent.

Getting the Staffing Mix Right

You already knew the jingle. Now you know what it takes to staff smarter. GLP-1 trials aren’t slowing down; they’re expanding into new endpoints, pushing enrollment goals higher, and raising the bar for execution.

The programs that stay on track are the ones that plan early, choose the right partners, and build flexible workforce capacity that can scale with the protocol, not fight against it.

Need help stabilizing or scaling your clinical research workforce for GLP-1 studies? Medix supports clinical research organizations with experienced talent, delivered through a consultative partnership model designed to help you plan smarter, staff faster, and execute with confidence.