1<!DOCTYPE html>
2
3Anonymous
4/bestp
5/bestp/domrep.nsf
6E1E00263F622952A652577AE0026ED0B
8
9
10
11
12
13
140
15
16
17/bestp/domrep.nsf/products/working-with-patient-advocacy-groups-trends-and-challenges?opendocument
18
19opendocument
2054.82.99.169
21
22
23www.best-in-class.com
24/bestp/domrep.nsf
25DB




Products & Services Medical Affairs Patient Advocacy

Working With Patient Advocacy Groups: Understanding the Advocacy Landscape

ID: 5102


Features:

10 Info Graphics

7 Data Graphics

31 Metrics

10 Narratives


Pages/Slides: 24


Published: Pre-2013


Delivery Format: Online PDF Document


 

License Options:
close

Single User: Authorizes use by the person who places the order or for whom the order was placed.

Sitewide: Authorizes use of the report for a geographic site. All people at site can view the report for a year and copies can be printed.

Corporate: Authorizes use for the entire company for a year and copies can be printed. No limitations for usage inside the company.




Buy Now

 


  • STUDY OVERVIEW
  • BENCHMARK CLASS
  • SPECIAL OFFER
Non-members: Click here to review a complimentary excerpt from "Working with Patient Advocacy Groups: Understanding the Advocacy Landscape"

STUDY OVERVIEW

Patient advocacy groups are among the most trusted sources of information for patients and thus it's important for bio-pharmaceutical organizations to forge transparent and trusting relationships with groups that align with a company's therapeutic areas.

Best Practices, LLC designed this benchmarking study to identify effective practices for understanding the landscape of patient advocacy groups in order to collaborate with the most appropriate partner. The study also addresses how to work with potentially hostile advocacy groups and build coalitions among different advocacy groups. This research also highlights emerging trends and challenges in patient advocacy.

KEY TOPICS

  • Understanding the advocacy landscape
  • Identifying effective practices for working with potentially hostile patient advocacy groups
  • Advocacy trends and lessons learned


SAMPLE METRICS
  • Percentage breakdown of the strategies and tactics used by companies to minimize opposition from patient advocacy against a controversial therapy
  • Percentage breakdown on the number of challenges affecting the advocacy market
  • Percentage breakdown on the issues and challenges forecasted to be most important in the near future
  • Types of lessons learned, pitfalls and success stories about relationships in patient advocacy


SAMPLE KEY FINDING

Finding Common Ground: How to Assess Advocacy Groups to Identify Points of Shared Interest:
  • Find common ground to build patient advocacy partnerships. Develop an advocacy approach that identifies and then emphasizes common ground between the commercial organization and the advocacy group. Though other divides may exist, partnerships must be built on mutually beneficial common issues.
  • Focus on objectives alignment, science and transparency – the cornerstones of strong relationships in socially sensitive disease areas. Proactively reach out to activist groups to understand their perspectives. Work through group members who are identified as being “the most reasonable.”

METHODOLOGY

Insights are drawn from survey responses from a total of 58 research participants at 43 pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical device companies. In-depth interviews were conducted to gather more detailed information pertinent to this study. Approximately half of the benchmark class (28 participants) consisted of executives representing top 50 bio-pharmaceutical companies.

Industries Profiled:
Diagnostic; Pharmaceutical; Biotech; Medical Device; Chemical; Manufacturing; Consumer Products; Health Care; Media; Service; Technology; Research


Companies Profiled:
Abaxis; Abbott Laboratories; Allos Therapeutics; Amgen; Anesiva; ANS; Astellas; Baxter; Bayer; Becton Dickinson; Boston Scientific; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Covidien; Daiichi Sankyo; Discovery Chicago; Eisai; Genentech; Genzyme; GlaxoSmithKline; IDS Canada; Infosys BPO; Johnson & Johnson; King Pharmaceuticals; Medrad; Novartis; Nupathe; Ocimum Biosolutions; Onyx Pharmaceuticals; Philips Home Healthcare; Purdue Pharma; Savient Pharmaceuticals; Solvay Pharmaceuticals; Synapse Biomedical; Takeda Pharmaceuticals; Talecris; Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd; Theratechnologies; Thoratec Corporation; Tibotec; Triple-S Inc; United Therapeutics; Vital Therapies


If you purchase Best Practice Database document(s), you will have 30 days from the date of purchase to apply some or all of the cost of the document(s) toward the cost of a Full Access Individual, Pharma, Group or University Membership. Write us at DatabaseTeam@bestpracticesllc.com or call David Guinn at 919-767-9179 if you have any questions.