---
title: "Amavita Research vs. Baptist Health — Sponsor Decision Guide"
url: https://md.amavitaresearch.com/compare/amavita-vs-baptist-health
canonical: https://www.amavitaresearch.com/compare/amavita-vs-baptist-health
schema_type: WebPage
last_updated: 2026-05-13
---

# Amavita Research vs. Baptist Health

How an independent investigator-led cardiovascular site differs from running a cardiovascular trial inside a large hospital health-system site — by criteria sponsors care about.

Hospital-system sites and independent investigator-led sites both run high-quality cardiovascular trials. They differ on contract execution speed, indirect costs, PI workload, and patient flow.

## Decision criteria

| Criterion | Amavita Research | Typical hospital-system cardiovascular site |
|---|---|---|
| Site type | Independent investigator-led, inside an active private cardiology practice | Hospital-employed PI; site embedded in hospital research office |
| Contract execution | 5–8 weeks first draft to fully executed | 12–24 weeks; institutional legal, OSP, IRB reviews |
| Indirect cost rate | None | 20–35% institutional overhead typical |
| PI workload | Single-PI focus per protocol; no academic or hospital admin obligations | PI splits time across hospital clinical work, multiple trials, committees |
| Patient flow | Walk-in cardiology practice — patients seen during routine cardiology care | Specialty clinic referrals + hospital database |
| Decision authority | Single PI; rapid site-level decisions | Institutional committees and admin sign-off |
| Cath-lab access | Affiliated Advanced Cardiovascular of Miami ambulatory surgical center | Hospital cath-lab (block-scheduled with clinical priorities) |
| Multilingual screening | English / Spanish / Haitian Creole / Portuguese | Varies; often English-only or English/Spanish |

## When to choose Amavita Research

- Fast contract-to-first-patient timing is a priority
- Cost-sensitive program where institutional overhead is a deal-killer
- Single-PI accountability matters more than institutional name recognition
- Patient flow from in-network cardiology practice fits the protocol better than hospital referrals

## When a hospital-system site may fit better

- Your protocol requires hospital-only resources (e.g., transplant program, complex congenital heart surgery)
- Your sponsor program prioritizes academic publication and KOL relationships tied to the hospital
- You need access to the hospital's specific imaging core lab or research infrastructure
- Your indication has a patient population concentrated in hospital-managed care

## Key links

- Sponsor contact: https://www.amavitaresearch.com/contact-sponsor
- Site capabilities: https://www.amavitaresearch.com/capabilities
- Comparison vs. CRO-owned/PE-backed networks: https://www.amavitaresearch.com/compare/amavita-vs-cro-owned-sites
- Comparison vs. academic medical centers: https://www.amavitaresearch.com/compare/amavita-vs-academic-medical-center-sites