Scientific Publications Strategy: Managing Reputation, Clinical Trial Results and Commercial Relevance
STUDY OVERVIEW
During the past few years, scientific journals and government regulators have increased the scrutiny and expectations facing pharmaceutical companies looking to publish the results of their clinical trials. With this scrutiny has come a shift in focus and transparency. Gone are the days of picking and choosing favorable findings to share, but now companies are struggling with how to measure the success of their Scientific Publications groups. With ever-changing expectations and regulations, global publications leaders at pharmaceutical companies must carefully build their strategies to present findings in an ethical and transparent manner. Best Practices conducted this research in 2011 and 2007 and you will see longitudinal data where appropriate. This will allow you to see how trends in Scientific Publications have evolved in the last four years.
KEY TOPICS COVERED IN THE RESEARCH
- Optimal structure for the global publications function
- Transition of global pub function from commercial to clinical
- Key internal stakeholders who contribute to publications strategy
- Tactics for handling publication of neutral or negative clinical trial results
- Impact of transparency guidelines on publications, planning and delivery
- Strategy changes for the new marketplace
METHODOLOGY
This study was conducted through surveys and qualitative interviews with pharmaceutical and biotechnology Global Publication Strategy executives.
Business Operations > Medical Affairs d
Industries Profiled:
Pharmaceutical; Medical Device; Health Care; Biotech; Diagnostic
Companies Profiled:
Alkermes; Astellas ; Baxter; Becton Dickinson; Boehringer Ingelheim; Cephalon Epigenomics; Ethicon; GlaxoSmithKline; Human Genome Sciences; Janssen; Lundbeck; Novartis; Novo Nordisk; Theravance; URL Pharma
Study Snapshot
This research was launched to determine how leading pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies are shaping their global publications strategies and plans in order to maintain scientific credibility while also delivering commercially relevant publications that drive brand success. The benchmark class includes 17 participants from 16 companies across the pharmaceutical, biotech and medical device industries.
Back to Top
Key Findings
Future Changes in Publication Environment: In 2011, 3 out of 4 benchmark partners include scenario planning for publishing clinical trials. Results in case of neutral or negative results. As compared to 33% of benchmark class in 2007, 50% of research partners in 2011 plan to increases emphasis on regional peer-reviewed journals in next year. However, 30% of benchmark companies plan to decrease their emphasis on e-journals in 2011. In coming 3 years, 45% of benchmark class plans to stress on review articles for market preparation while 4 out of 10 participants will increase their emphasis on global and regional peer-reviewed journals for greater transparency.
- Global Peer-Reviewed Publications Most Effective Publication Vehicle During Phase III & Post Launch: Relative to 2007, global peer-reviewed publication as most effective vehicle has dropped by 46%. Consequently, an equal 46% of benchmark partners consider global peer-reviewed publication as most effective during phase-III and post launch. Relative to 2007, during early product development phases 20% of respondents consider specialty journals as most effective vehicle, while during phase-III 27% lesser benchmark class partners deem specialty journals as most effective vehicle for publication.
Back to Top
Related Research:
|