About this opportunity
监控与临床研究网站和临床试验参与相关的患者数据和学习相关信息。确保调查员遵守研究协议、法规要求和良好临床实践，并为数据验证计划提供投入。提供及时和准确的监测患者数据和研究相关信息，从源文件，研究记录和现场访问（如果适用）。 可以监控学习地点和审计设施的选择。
Major Accountabilities~ 对可能的试验中心进行选址，以评估其进行临床试验的能力 ~ 进行中心启动访问，确保现场人员在所有试验相关方面得到充分培训 ~ 运用公司政策和程序解决各种问题 ~ 经常在公司内部和外部进行联系。 代表特定项目的组织 ~ 致力于实现各种以成本为中心的目标 ~ 担任Novartis与各中心之间的前线联络员，以确保成功协作、中心参与并满足Novartis对重要节点和交付的期望 ~ 在收到诺华产品后24小时内报告与诺华产品相关的技术投诉/不良事件/特殊情况 ~ 营销样本的分发（如适用）Key Performance Indicators监控与临床研究网站和临床试验参与相关的患者数据和学习相关信息。确保调查员遵守研究协议、法规要求和良好临床实践，并为数据验证计划提供投入。提供及时和准确的监测患者数据和研究相关信息，从源文件，研究记录和现场访问（如果适用）。 可以监控学习地点和审计设施的选择。Work Experience~运营管理和执行~项目管理~代表组织Skills~临床监测~临床研究~临床试验管理系统~临床试验~协作~数据完整性~生命科学~临床研究报告~决策能力Language英语
Job details
How this role compares
Computed from every other active Clinical Research role in our database, not just this employer's listings.
We currently track 339 comparable Clinical Research roles across 26 biopharma companies.
Salary context
73 of 339 peers report a salary range (USD, annualized)
Peers share this role's job function. This posting doesn't list a seniority level, so peers aren't narrowed by seniority either -- the range below may span more levels than usual.
Where these roles are based
Top locations among the 339 comparable roles
+ 42 more countries
Seniority mix
232 of 339 peers have a known seniority level
Therapeutic area mix
23 of 339 peers have a known therapeutic area; the rest are genuinely unlabeled, not hidden
Similar opportunities
The closest matches from our peer group, ranked by how similar they are, not how well you'd qualify for them -- treat this as market context, not a guaranteed shortlist; a weak match is labeled as one below.
Notify me about similar jobs
Get an email when we spot other openings like this one – same job function, comparable seniority, roles you'd actually want to see.
Or follow a whole field: get every new Clinical Research Associate job in China, and choose locations and companies.
How we calculate "similar"
No black box, no LLM guesswork: a deterministic score built from four normalized attributes. Here's this role's own peer group at different match levels, so you can see the mechanism, not just the result.
Every comparison starts from the same 100-point budget: 25 for working in the same function, 40 for the same therapeutic area, 20 for the same or adjacent seniority, 15 for the same country. A dimension we can't confirm on both sides contributes nothing, never a guess, never a free pass.
0 points, never a partial guess. A role we know almost nothing about beyond its function bottoms out at 25%; it never inflates to 100% just because there's little to compare against. Seniority uses a defined ladder (Associate → Manager → Associate Director → Senior → Principal → Director → Senior Director → Executive/VP) so "Director" and "Senior Director" count as adjacent, but "Director" and "Executive/VP" do not.