Didn't reach the interview stage. There's an assessment stage first which includes a written assessment and a timed proofreading assessment. These assessments were extremely time intensive to work on without even a short interview beforehand, and quite a lot to ask of someone who is already stressed out looking for a job without being paid. Despite being difficult, I personally did enjoyed the written assessment and learning about the clinical trial I was assigned to study. However, the timed assessment was especially difficult, and felt like it was designed to fail you - looking for roughly 50 errors in a document and writing a 'strong' conclusion - in an hour no less, which they claimed is 'standard' in the industry with time-constrained clients etc. I just realised this after getting the rejection email, and reading through some comments here, that they will first look at your proofreading exercise. Failing that means your written assessment is not reviewed and go down the drain for all the hours spent on it. I understand they have high standards, are not short on candidates and only looking for exceptional ones, but this is rather unprofessional considering the time and effort one put into the written assessment - I spent up to 8 hours just to make a 'client-ready' report / critique on the paper I'm assigned to study (and I don't believe it can be completed in less than 4 hours). Moreover, I believe there are many aspects to this job and proofreading is just a part of it - I believe they should consider candidates more as a whole. After experiencing this, I believe this slightly reflects what the company is like to work for and their expectations. I imagine this is one of the steps in place to weed out people who are not in line with the company culture. In my rejection email, they said that "the team firmly believe that I am a strong candidate" and majority applicants are rejected at CV / cover letter stage - but looking at the reviews here, even after passing this stage, there's still more to go. This makes me wonder what is their acceptance rate for this role, and that they should make a change to their recruiting system to get more ideal candidates for them to avoid people investing so much time for an assessment / interview which will most likely lead to rejection. Overall, the entire experience was interesting, but frustrating and unproductive in the end.

I passed CV screening and went about the first round (proofreading + writing assessment). They gave me a week for that; the writing assessment involved answering some questions based on a research article, and the proofreading assessment involved making 50+ edits to an article and writing a 300 word summary of an article in 1 hour. The recruiter + some others review it, and I was then invited to the final stage interview in Boston. It was further away, so I did it virtually -- 15 min presentation w/ questions to an analyst + senior analyst, you present on a report with a similar topic to the writing assessment, and 45 min behavioral interview with a more senior leader. Interview ran long (they ask a lot of presentation followups) and I ended 25 minutes past the timeframe haha, but all good I hope. Interviewers were all sweet and gave gentle feedback/broadened some of your responses in the moment, if needed. It was a bit tough, but make sure to prepare well, and you got this! Still waiting to hear back and will update the result later.