Clinician (Oncology / Hematology)

$160–200/hrrate as listed

Board-certified oncologists and hematologists author and review evaluation tasks built on real trial documentation — CSRs, safety narratives, periodic safety reports, and regulatory correspondence — to test whether AI models reason defensibly about efficacy and toxicity. Work is remote, contract, and self-scheduled, with observed rates of $160–200/hr.

Summary, eligibility guidance and screening preparation are prepared by Sidequest from the platform's posting. Check the source listing before applying.

What the work involves

You write and grade tasks that put a model's clinical reasoning under pressure. In practice that means constructing prompts from trial-adjacent material — protocol excerpts, investigator brochures, CSR sections, safety narratives, DSMB/IDMC packets — and then judging whether a model's output holds up clinically. Typical questions: does the stated effect size actually support the efficacy conclusion for this endpoint? Is the AE grade consistent with CTCAE and with the narrative's own description? Is attribution to study drug defensible, or is the model asserting causality the data won't carry? Does the dose modification follow the protocol, and would a real investigator have done it?

A second, equally important half of the job is written rationale. Every judgment needs a structured explanation that a non-clinical reviewer — an AI trainer, not a colleague — can follow and reuse. Reviewers who can say "this is wrong" but not "this is wrong because Lugano requires X and the report applied Y" don't last long on this kind of program.

What the screening measures

micro1's process is AI-led and conversational, with follow-ups that go deeper when you make a specific claim. Expect it to probe:

Verifiable credentials — specialist registration or board certification in medical oncology and/or hematology, plus 5+ years post-training.
Trial-side experience — investigator, sub-investigator, medical monitor, safety physician, or clinical development physician; committee work (IDMC, DSMB, adjudication, IRC) is a strong signal.
Framework fluency under follow-up — CTCAE grading, RECIST/Lugano/IMWG/IWCLL/ELN, and what ORR, DoR, PFS, OS, and MRD do and don't tell you.
Evaluation judgment — whether you can separate a genuinely implausible claim from legitimate practice variation, and whether you flag with reasons rather than instinct.

No prior AI or annotation experience is required or expected.

Logistics

Fully remote, contractor engagement, asynchronous. Most clinicians on comparable programs work 5–15 hours per week on their own schedule, with occasional calibration sessions or written guideline updates. Volume is project-driven and can fluctuate between cohorts, so treat this as a supplement to clinical practice rather than a replacement. Pay of $160–200/hr reflects observed rates for this listing and is set per project, not guaranteed.

What they look for

clinical oncology
clinical hematology
clinical trial evaluation
ctcae grading
recist
lugano criteria
imwg criteria
iwcll criteria
eln criteria
outcome endpoint analysis (orr, dor, pfs, os, mrd)
dose escalation assessment
adverse event grading and attribution
regulatory document review (csrs, protocols, investigator brochures, safety narratives, dsm/idmc materials)
benefit-risk analysis
clinical reasoning
structured written communication
guideline-based documentation
explaining complex information to non-clinical audiences
medical monitoring
committee participation (idmc, dsmb, adjudication, independent review)
peer-reviewed publication
attention to detail
critical thinking
problem identification and resolution

Before you apply

Would you pass this screen?

Drawn from what this listing actually requires. Answered in your browser — nothing is sent to us, and we do not store your answers.

Are you currently registered as a specialist in medical oncology and/or hematology in your country of practice, or do you hold board certification in one or both disciplines?
Specialist registration or board certification in medical oncology or hematology · required
Do you have at least 5 years of clinical experience in oncology and/or hematology after completing specialist training or residency?
5+ years post-training clinical experience · required
Have you served as an investigator, sub-investigator, medical monitor, safety physician, or clinical development physician on at least one clinical trial in oncology or hematology?
Direct involvement in clinical trials · required
Are you proficient in applying CTCAE grading and at least one of the following: RECIST, Lugano, IMWG, IWCLL, or ELN response criteria in a clinical trial or clinical practice setting?
Hands-on experience with response criteria and endpoints · preferred
Do you have authorship on a peer-reviewed publication related to a clinical trial or clinical outcomes in oncology or hematology?
Peer-reviewed publication record · preferred

0 of 5 answered

Included with this listing

Interview prep — 11 questions

Matched to what this platform's screening actually measures. Answer each out loud in 60–90 seconds: claim → concrete example → implication.

What it tests: Whether the candidate has hands-on trial experience and can articulate the nuanced judgment calls that distinguish a specialist from a generalist—not just trial exposure, but ownership of a hard call.
A strong answer: A clear narrative of a trial role with a concrete safety or efficacy judgment: dose escalation halted due to toxicity pattern, or efficacy threshold met despite protocol deviation, or safety signal interpretation requiring reconciliation of lab and clinical data. Must name the trial phase, patient population, and the competing considerations that made the decision non-obvious.
Where people lose it: Describing only observational or administrative trial roles ('I enrolled patients') without examples of judgment calls made; or describing a decision that was straightforward protocol application rather than reasoned evaluation of conflicting signals.