Real cost per click and per study page visit from university recruitment campaigns, the published cost per enrolled participant, how the costs stack up from impression to enrollment, what makes a study cheaper or more expensive to fill, and how to set a recruitment advertising budget you can defend.
Clinical trial advertising has two costs: ad spend paid to the platform, and the fee for building and running the campaign. On Facebook and Instagram, TrialFill's nine university campaigns averaged $0.42 per link click and $6.35 per 1,000 impressions. Published research puts online recruitment at a median of $72 per enrolled participant, against $199 for offline methods. For a single-site academic study, monthly ad budgets typically run from a few hundred to a few thousand dollars. This guide is part of TrialFill's overview of clinical trial advertising.
The money paid to the platform, such as Meta for Facebook and Instagram, to show the ads. You set it as a daily or total budget and it is spent as the ads are shown. It either runs through your institution's own ad account, or a vendor pays the platform and passes the cost through. Ask for it at cost, with the platform's receipts, and kept on its own line so your budget office can see it.
Writing the ads, preparing the IRB packet, building and launching the campaign, and optimizing and reporting while it runs. Vendors price this in very different ways:
| Pricing model | How it works | Who uses it |
|---|---|---|
| Per-study price | One price agreed up front for a set period, with ad spend separate at cost | Specialist campaign firms, including TrialFill |
| Retainer plus media | A monthly or project fee, with ad spend billed on top | Healthcare marketing agencies |
| Pay per referral or randomization | A fee for each referred, screened, or randomized patient, usually with ad spend built in | Recruitment platforms and networks |
| Bundled | Recruitment is one line inside a larger study contract | Full-service CROs |
Per-referral pricing can look cheaper or more expensive depending on how a "referral" is defined, so get the definition in writing. A form fill, a passed pre-screen, and a scheduled visit are very different things. The recruitment companies comparison covers how each type of vendor charges.
Every figure below is either first-party data exported from Meta Ads Manager or from a peer-reviewed study. Vendor estimates without a traceable source are left out.
| Metric | Figure | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Cost per 1,000 impressions (Facebook and Instagram) | $6.35 | TrialFill, nine UAB campaigns, 2023 to 2026 |
| Cost per link click | $0.42 | TrialFill, nine UAB campaigns |
| Cost per link click, range by study | $0.23 to $0.70 | TrialFill, best round to highest-cost study |
| Link click-through rate | 1.51% | TrialFill, nine UAB campaigns |
| Cost per click, Facebook health research | $0.51 | JMIR 2017, median of 35 studies |
| Cost per recruited participant, Facebook | $14.41 | JMIR 2017, median, 2017 dollars |
| Cost per enrolled participant, online recruitment | $72 | JMIR 2020, median, studies using both methods |
| Cost per enrolled participant, offline recruitment | $199 | JMIR 2020, same studies |
Two cautions. The published cost-per-participant figures come from studies with different populations and definitions of "recruited," so treat them as a range, not a quote. And the JMIR 2017 figures are in 2017 dollars; ad costs have risen since. More context for each figure is on the clinical trial recruitment statistics page.
Clicks are cheap. Enrollments are not, because most of the cost sits after the click. Each step below loses people, and each loss raises the cost of the next step.
spend ÷ impressions × 1,000Cost per 1,000 times the ad is shown. Set by the platform's auction, your audience size, and how competitive the time of year is.
spend ÷ link clicksHow many people tap through to the study page or screener. Clear, specific copy and a relevant image raise the click-through rate and lower this number.
spend ÷ screener completionsPeople who finish the screener and leave contact details. A short, mobile-friendly screener matters as much as the ad here.
spend ÷ pre-screen passesInquiries that pass the self-assessment questions. Stating the one criterion most people fail on, in the ad itself, improves this step more than anything else.
spend ÷ participants enrolledConfirmed by study staff after screening and consent. Follow-up speed decides this step: inquiries go cold within days.
Suppose a campaign pays $0.50 per click, 10% of visitors complete the screener, half of those pass the pre-screen, and one in five of those enrolls. Then each inquiry costs $5, each qualified inquiry $10, and each enrolled participant $50 in ad spend. Double the click cost, or halve the share who finish the screener, and the cost per enrolled participant doubles.
The conversion rates here are assumptions for illustration, not benchmarks. Use your own study's history where you have it, and run the numbers at a few different rates.
A study for adults 18 to 65 costs less to fill than one for a narrow age band with several exclusions. The ad has to reach more people to find each eligible one.
A 25-mile radius around one site is a small audience, and the platform charges more to reach the same people repeatedly. Multi-site or remote studies have more room.
Mental health, sexual health, and similar areas limit what an ad can say under Meta's personal attributes rule, which can lower click-through and raise cost per click.
Frequent visits, overnight stays, or procedures shrink the share of eligible people who say yes, raising the cost per enrolled participant even when clicks are cheap.
Spending fast to hit a near deadline usually means paying more per click than a campaign that can pace itself over several weeks.
The most expensive problem and the most fixable. Inquiries that wait days for a call are paid for but rarely enroll.
Four Meta campaigns TrialFill ran for University of Alabama at Birmingham research studies, from Ads Manager. Inquiry and enrollment counts live in each study team's own screener, so the figures stop at the click or the visit.
| Study | Ad spend | Result | Cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adolescent epilepsy study, 2 campaigns | $600 | 854 study page visits | $0.70 / visit |
| Women's health study, 30 days | $1,000 | 1,782 study page visits | $0.56 / visit |
| Women's health follow-on, $3,000 over 90 days (live) | $850 so far | 1,217 study page visits | $0.70 / visit |
| Neurology study, 5 campaigns, 2023 to 2026 | $2,599 | 7,007 link clicks | $0.37 / click |
The pattern across these studies: a few hundred dollars a month buys a steady flow of visits to a local study page, and the research team that came back for five rounds reached $0.23 per click in its best round. Every campaign is on the results page.
The free recruitment rate calculator runs steps one to three for you and projects the ad spend. For a full plan, the recruitment plan template walks through the budget alongside timeline and screening.
For how the campaigns themselves are set up on Meta, see Facebook ads for clinical trials.
There are two costs: ad spend paid to the platform, and the fee for whoever builds and runs the campaign. Across nine Meta campaigns for university research studies, TrialFill paid an average of $0.42 per link click and $6.35 per 1,000 impressions. For a single-site academic study, monthly ad budgets typically run from a few hundred to a few thousand dollars. The fee depends on the vendor's pricing model.
A 2020 JMIR meta-analysis found online recruitment cost a median of $72 per enrolled participant, compared with $199 for offline methods, in studies that used both. A 2017 JMIR review of Facebook recruitment in 35 health studies found a median of $14.41 per recruited participant. Your own cost depends on eligibility criteria, visit burden, and how quickly the study team follows up on inquiries.
TrialFill's nine Meta campaigns for University of Alabama at Birmingham studies averaged $0.42 per link click, ranging from $0.23 in the best round to about $0.70 per study page visit in the highest-cost studies. The 2017 JMIR review of 35 health studies found a median of $0.51 per click.
Work backward from the enrollment goal. Estimate how many inquiries it takes to enroll one participant, multiply by the participants you still need, then multiply by a cost per inquiry from your own past campaigns or a conservative range. Spread that over the weeks left, and recheck every two weeks against real numbers. The free recruitment rate calculator does the math.
Narrow eligibility criteria, a small recruitment area, conditions that limit ad wording, demanding visit schedules, tight timelines that force faster spending, and slow follow-up on inquiries. Slow follow-up is the most fixable: inquiries that are not contacted quickly are paid for but rarely enroll.
Usually the study budget: a grant, a sponsor's recruitment budget, or departmental funds. Ad spend can run through the institution's own ad account, or a vendor can pay the platform and pass the cost through at cost with receipts. Many grant budgets list recruitment advertising as its own line, so separating ad spend from service fees makes approval easier.
Per printed piece, flyers are cheaper, but they reach only people who walk past them. Per enrolled participant, the 2020 JMIR meta-analysis found online recruitment cost a median of $72 versus $199 for offline methods, and recruited about four times faster per active day, in studies that ran both.
Send your criteria, timeline, and goal. You'll get a recruitment plan back within one business day with a recommended ad budget, recruitment area, and projected cost per inquiry. Free, with no obligation.
Get my recruitment plan