Pharma HCPEngagement Report - vs01

Pharmaceutical
industry: HCP
engagement
The what, where, when and how of
reaching your audience in the digital age.
Contents
Contents
Introduction 04
Methodology 06
Executive Summary 07
Channels for Industry delivery 08 Types of medical content 18

and HCP access of medical content
How frequently do you access the following
In general, what value do you attribute to the types of information online? 18
following sources of medical information? 08
Within your area of responsibility, do you provide
What value do you think HCPs healthcare professionals with the following types
attribute to the following channels? 08 of content in 2015? 19
Do you think you need better access to Does your organisation work with pharma clients
the following sources of medical content? 10 to provide healthcare professionals with the
following types of content in 2015? 20
What prevents you from accessing the
following more frequently? 11 Do you think you need more or better access to
the following types of medical content? 21
To what extent do the following channels
play a part in your delivery of information
to HCPs in 2015? 12 Format and features of medical content 22
Does your organisation work with ow important do you consider the following
H
pharmaceutical clients to support HCPs possible features of medical websites and
via the following channels? 13 online resources? 22
How important are the following channels In your experience, what proportion
in notifying you about new medical content of online medical resources currently
and resources? 14 offer the following features? 23
Within your area of responsibility, do you provide

Sources of online medical content 15 or fund online resources that offer HCPs the
following features? 24
ow frequently do you access the following
H
sources of online medical content? 15
Devices used to access medical content 25
In general, what level of credibility and trust
do you associate with the following sources On average, approximately how much time do
of medical content? 15 you spend accessing online medical content via
the following devices each day? 25
Do you have experience of partnering with
independent medical websites to provide How do you think your usage of the following
content for HCPs? 16 devices for work purposes has changed over the
last 12 months? 26
What types of content have you
supported via third party websites? 16 What proportion of your online content
for HCPs is mobile-optimised? 27
How would you describe the performance of the
content you have supported or supplied via third Do you expect that all of your online content
party websites for HCPs? 17 for HCPs will be mobile-optimised by 2016? 27
How would you describe your overall experience

of working with third party websites? 17
02
Contents
Contents
Industry provision – factors affecting delivery of 28

medical content for HCPs
How successful do you believe your/your

clients’ organisation is currently at achieving
multichannel integration? 28
What are the main sources of digital/

multichannel expertise within your area
of responsibility? 29
How well resourced do you think your

organisation is currently for supporting
multichannel/digital activities to support HCPs? 29 About the HCP respondents 41
To what extent do you think that the following Please select your core medical specialty and
present a challenge to your/your clients’ any other areas of interest 41
HCP-focused digital activities during 2015? 30
In which decade were you born? 42
Please complete the following sentence:
What is your gender? 42
The key to effectively reaching and engaging
healthcare professionals online is… 31 Where are you located? 42
HCPs – factors affecting consumption 33 About the Industry respondents 43

of medical content
What type of organisation do you work for? 43
How frequently do you seek medical information
Where are you located? 43
online under the following circumstances? 33
What is your geographical area of responsibility? 43
How much influence do the following
factors have over your decision to access What type of role do you personally perform? 44
an online resource? 34
In which decade were you born? 44
To what extent do you think the following
What is your gender? 44
factors influence HCPs’ decisions to access
online resources? 34
Conclusions 45
Are you willing to supply providers of medical
content with additional information about About EPG Health Media 48
yourself if it helps them to supply content
tailored to your specific needs? 36
In general, how would you describe the

following in relation to the medical content
that you find online? 36
In general, what level of credibility and trust

do you associate with the following sources
of medical content? 37
What is your greatest frustration with accessing

the information you need online? 38
03
Introduction
Background
The majority of today’s

healthcare professionals
(HCPs) are ‘digital natives’.
This means that most qualified since the Internet went

15% Only 15% of current
pharma marketing
mainstream. In the meantime, digital platforms, tools, activity is digital.
features and opportunities have grown, and continue
to grow, exponentially. This revolution brings with it
expectations for better, quicker, cheaper and more
personalised access to content, crucial to easing the funding
and time constraints experienced by modern day doctors.
Today, to effectively reach and engage with their HCP

audiences, pharmaceutical companies (pharma) need
to plan communications with the digital native in mind,
providing the tools they can choose to help them support
their patients. Failure to do this not only increases the risk
of poor engagement and marketing effectiveness, but also
the potential to alienate and lose credibility and trust.
‘Digital’ currently accounts for approximately only 15%

of pharma marketing activity. Pharma is notoriously slow
to adapt to the digital world that its customers live and
work in and has been accused of adopting a ‘wait and
watch’ approach. Is that the case, or actually, due to the
numerous industry-specific challenges that pharma has
to contend with, is pharma genuinely attempting but
struggling to understand and adopt the right approaches?
Digital is often viewed in isolation from the rest of Everyone is confident that they should be aiming for
the marketing mix but the key to good multichannel ‘customer-centricity’ but few seem confident about what
engagement is to integrate digital channels with offline it really means or how to deliver it. Significant focus
channels such as conferences, print and sales force. To is placed on achieving audience ‘reach’ and selecting
what extent is pharma currently doing this? Do the channel the right channels to use. However, to ensure good
mixes that pharma is currently selecting correlate with engagement, pharma needs to focus not just on ‘where’
those that HCPs are choosing to access? their customers are but also ‘when’, ‘how’ and ‘why’
their customers want to engage and ‘what’ with.
To deliver true customer-centricity, pharma marketers

need to understand and deliver on each of these points.
Together with marketing objectives, all questions in
combination should form the basis of good pharma HCP
engagement strategies, especially since unclear strategy
is believed to be the greatest challenge for pharma right
now (source: The Digital Futures 2014 survey).
The purpose of this study is to shed light on the current

content needs and engagement behaviour of HCPs, and
to identify gaps between these and the supply of content
by pharma.
04
Introduction
?
Study objectives
The objectives of this study

are to provide insight into:
!
Channels (where?)
• Where do HCPs want to access medical content?
• Where is Industry placing its content for HCPs?
Types of content (what?)

• What content types are HCPs accessing?
• What content types is Industry supplying for HCPs?

Potential outcomes
Format & features (how?)

• How do HCPs want content presented to them? This study is important to the
pharmaceutical industry because it
• How is Industry presenting its content to HCPs?
may support decisions related to:
Supply versus demand • Types of content to support or provide for

HCP audiences
• Identify where gaps or imbalances exist between
HCP demand and Industry provision of medical content • Channels through which to deliver content
(based on types, channels, features and format). to HCPs
• Identify obstacles to Industry supply and HCP access • Formats in which to make content available
of medical content. and the features it should contain
• Uncover Industry awareness of HCP demands • Multichannel strategy approaches

and preferences. • Analyzing the strengths and weaknesses
of a content strategy
• Understanding opportunities for better

HCP reach and engagement
• Challenging or supporting decisions around

planning, funding and delivery of content
• Organisational change management related

to capabilities, processes and technologies.
05
Methodology
Methodology
This report is based on

an independent study
designed and conducted by
EPG Health Media (Europe) Ltd.
Every effort has been taken to ensure that the study

is transparent, comprehensive and reliable.
The study is based on surveys conducted with two target

respondent groups: healthcare professionals (‘HCPs’) and
pharmaceutical industry professionals (‘pharma’ and ‘service
providers’, together referred to as ‘Industry’). The findings
from each respondent group are presented independently
and also compared in this report.
Note: results are reliable

to within +/- 6% at the 95%
Sample groups
confidence level for HCP
survey data and to within
+/- 7.5% for pharmaceutical Healthcare professionals
industry survey data.
Target respondents Medically qualified healthcare professionals (validated through

registration and a qualifying question)
Respondent source epgonline.org database of healthcare professionals
Sample size 216
Location Global
Survey language English
Survey period July–August 2015
Survey method Emailed link to an online (web based) survey
Sampling Random, voluntary (no honoraria), no control group
Pharmaceutical industry professionals
Target respondents Pharmaceutical companies and their service providers (agencies)

(validated through registration and a qualifying question)
Respondent Source EPG Health Media database, Pharmaphorum database,

social media (verified using a qualifying question)
Sample size 137 (66 pharmaceutical, 71 service provider)
Location Global
Survey language English
Survey period July–August 2015
Survey method Emailed link to an online survey
Sampling Random, voluntary (no honoraria), no control group
Report response key

Healthcare professionals Service providers Pharmaceutical Industry
06
Pharma
Executive Summary
Executive Summary
views
Pharma
views
Channels for delivery

of medical content (where)
HCP
HCPs are accessing medical content via many
channels and to varying extents, each with views
associated benefits and challenges, including cost,
convenience and trust. Pharma organisations are
utilising these same channels but not necessarily
to optimal benefit for themselves or their customers.
In part this is due to a lack of awareness of the
level of value that HCPs associate with each
channel, and in part a decision to pursue their
own objectives. The study highlights opportunities
to address the balance to benefit both parties. Insights from the
study indicate some
Types of medical content (what) significant gaps or
HCPs are accessing credible, unbranded educational
content frequently, and branded promotional material
imbalances between
less so. There is a lack of correlation between HCP
demand and industry supply of medical content.
HCP consumption and
Industry is under-supporting the types of content
that HCPs access and trust most and oversupplying
Industry provision
the types of content that they access and trust least. of medical content.
The study sheds light on what these are and the
potential they have to impact HCPs and Industry.
This highlights areas where pharma

Format and features companies can adapt or refine the
for medical content (how) ways in which they choose to reach,
A gap exists between how doctors want to view engage and support their customers.
online content and how pharma is currently
presenting it. Industry needs to put significantly
more emphasis on the format of the online medical
content that it provides. Medical content that
provides a valuable and convenient user experience
for HCPs will help them in practice and attract better
engagement and trust. The message is clear: ‘Make
it easy to access, digest and save’ and this report
provides insight into how this can be achieved.
07
Channels for Industry delivery and HCP access of medical content
In general, what value do you attribute to

the following sources of medical information?
Healthcare professionals (Fig. 1) No value Limited value Moderate value Significant value
General social platforms

48% 30% 18% 3%
(e.g. Twitter, Facebook)
Wikipedia 20% 39% 29% 12%
Meetings with pharmaceutical

22% 31% 38% 9%
company representatives
Video channels 15% 38% 42% 5%
Pharmaceutical brand websites 13% 40% 39% 8%
Medical apps 14% 29% 45% 12%
Webcasts and webinars 11% 31% 47% 11%
Pharmaceutical educational websites 9% 35% 47% 9%
Exhibition halls at conferences 9% 27% 49% 15%
Email announcements and newsletters 5% 29% 51% 15%
Professional social networks and

6% 27% 48% 19%
forums (for healthcare professionals)
Independent medical websites 4% 16% 54% 26%
Print materials
2% 18% 47% 34%
(e.g. journals, books, leaflets)
Live events (conferences and meetings) 3% 16% 40% 41%
Government, university, hospital

0% 7% 41% 52%
or other institutional websites
Medical society or association websites 1% 6% 37% 55%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
What value do you think HCPs

attribute to the following channels?
Pharmaceutical (Fig. 2) No value Limited value Moderate value Significant value

19% 59% 19% 4%
7% 17% 52% 24%
Medical apps 2% 28% 52% 19%
Exhibition halls at conferences 9% 24% 46% 20%

0% 15% 50% 35%
Print materials
0% 30% 50% 20%

4% 11% 31% 54%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
08
What value do you think HCPs

attribute to the following channels?
Service providers (Fig. 3) No value Limited value Moderate value Significant value

11% 58% 28% 3%
3% 35% 52% 10%
Exhibitions at conferences 1% 32% 48% 18%
Professional social networks and forums 1% 23% 42% 34%
Print materials
1% 23% 51% 25%

0% 8% 37% 55%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
The majority (at least 80%) of HCP survey respondents (Fig.1) While demonstrating awareness of the preferences of HCPs for
attributed ‘moderate’ or ‘significant’ value to each of the different sources of medical information, pharmaceutical (Fig.2)
following sources of medical information: ‘government, and service provider (Fig.3) responses showed misconceptions.
university, hospital or other institutional websites’, ‘medical Both groups overestimated the value of ‘pharmaceutical
society or association websites’, ‘print materials’, ‘live events’ reps’, with 76% of pharma and 62% of service provider
and ‘independent medical websites’. respondents believing them to be of ‘moderate’ or ‘significant’
value, compared to less than half of HCPs who reported that
Sources of medical information reported by most (over half) HCP to be the case. They also overestimated the value that HCPs
respondents as being of ‘limited’ or ‘no’ value were: ‘general currently attribute to ‘social media channels’, with less than
social platforms’, ‘Wikipedia’, ‘pharmaceutical reps’, ‘video 20% of industry respondents believing them to be of ‘no value’,
channels’ and ‘pharmaceutical brand websites’. compared to 48% of the HCP respondents who reported that to
be the case.
Key insight
Over half of HCPs place limited or no value on
pharma representatives as a source of medical
information. Industry respondents believed
reps to be more highly valued and cite them
as one of the main channels of information
delivery to HCPs.
09
Do you think you need better access to

the following sources of medical content?
Healthcare professionals (Fig. 4) Yes No

19% 81%
Pharmaceutical
24% 76%
brand websites
25% 75%
Video channels 32% 68%
Exhibition halls at conferences 37% 63%
Pharmaceutical
37% 63%
educational websites
Email announcements
41% 59%
and newsletters
Webcasts and webinars 44% 56%

50% 50%
Medical apps 51% 49%
Independent medical websites 57% 43%
Print materials
60% 40%
Live events (conferences
61% 39%
and meetings)
69% 31%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
At least half of all HCP respondents stated that they need

better access to ‘institutional websites’, ‘live events’, ‘print
materials’, ‘independent websites’, ‘apps’ and ‘professional
networks/forums’.
Less than 25% thought they needed better access to ‘general

social platforms’, ‘pharmaceutical brand websites’ or ‘meetings
with pharmaceutical representatives’.
10
What prevents you from accessing

the following more frequently?
Healthcare professionals (Fig. 5) Lack of interest Lack of transparency or trust Lack of time Cost
Difficulty gaining access Lack of availability Other

11% 6% 37% 9% 19% 14% 4%
Medical society or
9% 6% 36% 13% 18% 12% 5%
association websites
Print materials (e.g. journals) 11% 6% 33% 23% 10% 10% 7%
Independent medical websites 10% 12% 32% 9% 16% 13% 7%
Exhibition halls at conferences 15% 9% 30% 23% 12% 8% 4%
Webcasts and webinars 20% 7% 30% 15% 12% 9% 6%

22% 10% 29% 7% 19% 8% 6%
forums
Medical apps 22% 13% 24% 17% 13% 7% 3%
Video channels 23% 10% 30% 7% 14% 10% 6%
Email announcements and

24% 13% 34% 2% 7% 8% 12%
newsletters
Wikipedia 21% 23% 31% 3% 6% 4% 11%
Pharmaceutical representatives 23% 26% 25% 3% 7% 8% 7%
Pharmaceutical educational websites 19% 36% 22% 5% 10% 4% 4%
General social platforms 37% 19% 22% 3% 9% 5% 5%
Pharmaceutical brand websites 26% 37% 19% 3% 8% 3% 3%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
‘Lack of time’ was cited by HCP respondents as the greatest

obstacle to accessing most content types more frequently,
with the exception of ‘pharmaceutical brand websites’,
‘pharmaceutical educational websites’ and ‘pharmaceutical
representatives’, for which ‘lack of transparency or trust’ was
identified as the greatest obstacle.
‘Lack of interest’ was reported as the main reason for not

accessing ‘general social platforms’ more frequently. ‘Cost’ and
‘lack of time’ were identified by HCPs as significant obstacles to
accessing ‘conference exhibitions’ and ‘print materials’.
11
To what extent do the following channels play a part

in your delivery of information to HCPs in 2015?
Pharmaceutical (Fig.6) Not at all Minor Moderate Major

37% 44% 13% 6%

31% 30% 28% 11%
Professional social
28% 33% 26% 13%
networks and forums
Independent medical
11% 37% 28% 24%
websites
Mobile optimised content 17% 28% 31% 24%
Email announcements and

9% 33% 39% 19%
newsletters
Pharmaceutical brand
15% 26% 33% 26%
websites
Medical Society or Association

15% 24% 30% 31%
websites
Exhibitions at conferences 4% 30% 35% 31%
Print materials (e.g. journals, books,

2% 30% 48% 20%
leaflets)
7% 17% 33% 43%
and meetings)
13% 6% 28% 54%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Pharma survey respondents reported that ‘pharmaceutical

representative’ meetings were their most significant channel
for delivery of information to HCPs (with over half describing
this as a major channel), followed by ‘live events’ (43%).
Over half of pharma respondents stated that the following

played only a ‘minor’ role or ‘no’ role at all: ‘general social
platforms’, ‘professional social platforms’, ‘video channels’,
‘institutional websites’ and ‘medical apps’.
12
Does your organisation work with pharmaceutical

clients to support HCPs via the following channels?
Service providers (Fig.7) Yes No
Print materials (e.g. journals,

69% 31%
books, leaflets)
Pharmaceutical
69% 31%
educational websites
Pharmaceutical
68% 32%
brand websites
68% 32%
and meetings)
Exhibitions at conferences 66% 34%
Email announcements
65% 35%
and newsletters
Mobile optimised content 58% 42%
Webcasts and webinars 56% 44%
Medical apps 55% 45%
Independent medical websites 48% 52%

44% 56%
Video channels (e.g. YouTube) 38% 62%
Professional social
37% 63%
networks and forums
General/public social platforms 25% 75%
Medical Society or
24% 76%
Association websites
17% 83%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Service providers reported working with pharmaceutical clients

fairly evenly across a range of channels to support HCPs.
More than 60% stated that they do so via ‘print materials’,
‘pharmaceutical brand websites’, ‘pharmaceutical educational
websites’, ‘live events’, ‘conference exhibitions’ and ‘email
announcements’.
Fewer than one third reported using ‘institutional websites’,

‘medical association websites’ or ‘general social platforms’
to support HCPs.
13
How important are the following channels in notifying

you about new medical content and resources?
Healthcare professionals (Fig.8) Not important Moderately important Very important

65% 29% 6%
Online advertising 49% 40% 12%

41% 43% 16%
representatives
Webcasts and webinars 26% 55% 19%
Exhibition halls at conferences 24% 60% 16%
Email announcements
14% 59% 26%
and newsletters
Print materials (e.g. journals,

13% 52% 35%
books, leaflets)
Employer/colleagues 12% 56% 32%
Live events (e.g. conferences

9% 49% 42%
and meetings)
Professional networks and forums

8% 53% 39%
(for healthcare professionals)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Of the 10 possible options provided in the survey, HCP

respondents cited ‘general social platforms’ as being the
least important channel for notifying them about new medical
content, with 65% stating they were ‘not important’. However,
by comparison, only 8% considered ‘professional networks and
forums’ to be ‘not important’.
‘Live events’, ‘employers/colleagues’, ‘print materials’ and

‘email announcements and newsletters’ were each considered
‘moderately important’ or ‘very important’ channels of
notification by more than three quarters of respondents, while
‘online advertising’ and ‘pharmaceutical representatives’ were
rated among the least important.
14
Sources of online medical content
How frequently do you access the following

sources of online medical content?
Healthcare professionals (Fig. 9)
100% Very frequently (daily)

5%
15% 18% 14% 6%
17% Frequently (weekly)
14%
80% 39% Occasionally (monthly)

43%
37% 40%
37% Rarely (yearly)
Never
60%
36%
40% 29%
30% 27% 28%
20%
12%
7% 9% 13% 12%
4% 3% 3%
0%
Independent Government Medical society Pharmaceutical Pharmaceutical
medical websites university, hospital or association brand websites educational
or other institutional websites websites
websites
Of the five options provided, HCPs reported most frequently once per week. Cited as being accessed least frequently by
accessing medical content via ‘independent websites’, with 58% HCP respondents were ‘pharmaceutical brand websites’ and
doing so at least once per week. Most (over half) also reported ‘pharmaceutical educational websites’, with fewer than a quarter
frequently using ‘government, university or other institutional doing so at least once per week.
websites’ and ‘medical society or association websites’ at least
In general, what level of credibility and trust do you

associate with the following sources of medical content?
100% 4% 3% Very high

28% 33% 13%
13%
21% High
37% Medium
80% 48%
Low
52% 46%
38% Very low
60%
42%
40%
20%
26%
18%
20%
17%
17%
3% 3% 6% 10%
0% 1% 1% 2%
Medical society Government Independent Pharmaceutical Pharmaceutical

or association university, hospital medical websites educational brand websites
websites or other institutional websites
websites
Most HCP respondents (over half) reported high or very high ‘Pharmaceutical educational websites’ and ‘pharmaceutical
levels of credibility and trust for ‘medical society or association brand websites’ were associated with least credibility and trust.
websites’, ‘government, university, hospital or other institutional
websites’ and ‘independent medical websites’.
15
Do you have experience of partnering

with independent medical websites to
provide content for HCPs?
Industry (Fig. 11)
Pharmaceutical Service providers

78% Yes 68% Yes
22% No 32% No
Most pharmaceutical and service provider respondents

reported having experience of working with independent
medical websites to provide content for HCPs.
What types of content have you

supported via third party websites?
Industry (Fig. 12)
Pharmaceutical Service provider

80%
75% 75%
71%
68% 69%
60%
60%
58%
56% 56%
48%
40%
40%
33% 33% 33%
20%
0%
Accredited medical Congress or Webcasts / Online banner Non-accredited eDetails Social media
education (CME) symposium webinars campaigns medical education presence
reports / video
Pharmaceutical respondents revealed that ‘accredited medical Less than half of pharma respondents had supported
education (CME)’ is the type of content they are most likely to ‘non-accredited medical education’, ‘eDetails’ or ‘social media’
support via third party/independent websites, with 75% having done via third party websites.
so. This compared to 56% of respondents from service providers
who have supported such content.
In addition to CME, over half of respondents from both pharma and

service providers have worked with third party websites to provide
‘congress or symposium reports/video’, ‘webcasts/webinars’ and
‘banner campaigns’.
16
How would you describe the performance

of the content you have supported or supplied
via third party websites for HCPs?
Industry (Fig. 13) Very successful Moderately successful Unsuccessful Variable It’s too soon I’m not aware of
to say the performance
Service
providers 17% 60% 0% 17% 0% 6%
Pharmaceutical 15% 63% 5% 20% 5% 0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Pharmaceutical and service provider respondents indicated

similar levels of success for content supplied to HCPs
via third party websites, with over 70% reporting the
performance as ‘moderately successful’ or ‘very successful’.
The majority of the remaining respondents indicated that
performance was ‘variable’.
How would you describe your overall

experience of working with third party websites?
Industry (Fig. 14) Very positive Positive Satisfactory Negative Very negative
Service
providers 13% 40% 46% 2% 0%
Pharmaceutical 10% 30% 55% 5% 0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
The vast majority (over 95%) of both industry respondent

groups described their experience of working with third party
websites as being ‘very positive’, ‘positive’ or ‘satisfactory’,
with none describing their experience as ’very negative’.
17
Types of medical content
How frequently do you access the

following types of information online?
Healthcare professionals (Fig.15) Never Rarely (yearly) Occasionally (monthly) Frequently (weekly) Very frequently (daily)
Medicine/drug data 1% 6% 25% 44% 24%
Journal articles 1% 5% 28% 42% 24%
Treatment guidelines 0% 11% 27% 42% 20%
Treatment strategies 1% 12% 31% 39% 18%
Medicine/drug news 3% 10% 41% 34% 12%
Medical images 3% 14% 40% 30% 13%
Clinical trial data 2% 14% 42% 30% 11%
Diagnostic tools 2% 10% 47% 31% 10%
Expert medical opinions 1% 16% 42% 27% 13%
Case studies 1% 14% 48% 25% 13%
Accredited educational resources (CME) 5% 17% 41% 29% 9%
Patient materials and tools 11% 27% 33% 24% 6%
Congress and Symposia

7% 35% 34% 18% 6%
videos, slides and highlights
Non-accredited educational resources 9% 31% 39% 18% 5%
Pharmaceutical drug detail aids 16% 26% 33% 17% 8%
Mode of action video/images 10% 35% 34% 16% 5%
Pharmaceutical company
20% 35% 25% 14% 7%
branded promotional materials
Blog posts by healthcare professionals 28% 29% 22% 16% 4%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
HCP respondents reported most frequently accessing ‘drug

data’, ‘journal articles’, ‘treatment guidelines’ and ‘treatment
strategies’, with over half doing so at least once per week.
‘Pharmaceutical company detail aids’ and ‘branded promotional

materials’ were reported among the content types least
frequently accessed, with over 40% reporting to access
these just once per year or less.
18
Within your area of responsibility, do you provide healthcare

professionals with the following types of content in 2015?
Pharmaceutical (Fig. 16) No Yes – decrease on last year Yes – same as last year Yes – increase on last year
HCPs access most

Medicine/drug data 12% 6% 41% 41%
Journal articles 24% 14% 49% 12%
Treatment guidelines 12% 6% 53% 29%
Treatment strategies 27% 8% 43% 22%
Medicine/drug news 18% 4% 55% 22%
Medical images 43% 10% 37% 10%
Clinical trial data 20% 10% 39% 31%
Diagnostic tools 31% 12% 29% 29%
Expert opinions 16% 14% 39% 31%
Case studies 24% 18% 37% 20%
Accredited educational resources (CME) 31% 12% 41% 16%
Patient materials and tools 18% 18% 29% 35%

16% 16% 41% 27%
Non-accredited educational resources 33% 16% 29% 22%
Drug detail aids 16% 14% 57% 12%
Mode of action video/images 24% 22% 35% 18%
HCPs access least

Branded promotional materials 16% 20% 39% 24%
Blog posts by healthcare professionals 63% 6% 24% 6%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
There was little correlation between pharma provision There appears to be greatest discrepancy between supply
of content types and the frequency with which HCPs and frequency of access for the following content types:
access those types of content.
• CME – 78% of HCPs reported accessing CME at least
With the exception of ‘blog posts written by HCPs’, once per month while 31% of pharma respondents
pharma respondents reported supporting HCPs with all reported not providing it.
content types listed, either in the same or higher volume
as the previous year (2014). • Medical images – 83% of HCPs reported accessing
them at least once per month, while 43% of pharma
respondents reported not providing these.
• Diagnostic tools – 88% of HCPs reported accessing

them at least once per month, while 31% of pharma
respondents reported not providing them.
• Promotional materials – 63% of pharmaceutical

respondents reported providing them in the same or
increased volume as the previous year, while 55% of
HCPs reported never or rarely accessing them.
19
Does your organisation work with pharma clients to

provide healthcare professionals with the following
types of content in 2015?
Service providers (Fig. 17) No Yes – decrease on last year Yes – same as last year Yes – increase on last year
HCPs access most

Medicine/drug data 27% 1% 49% 23%
Journal articles 30% 6% 44% 21%
Treatment guidelines 30% 6% 48% 17%
Treatment strategies 34% 4% 41% 21%
Medicine/drug news 30% 4% 48% 18%
Medical images 42% 18% 27% 13%
Clinical trial data 34% 4% 49% 13%
Diagnostic tools 39% 4% 34% 23%
Expert opinions 21% 3% 46% 30%
Case studies 15% 11% 48% 25%
Accredited educational resources (CME) 49% 14% 23% 14%
Patient materials and tools 27% 4% 41% 28%

23% 8% 48% 21%
Non-accredited educational resources 28% 8% 46% 17%
Drug detail aids 41% 17% 25% 17%
Mode of action video/images 31% 10% 41% 18%
HCPs access least

Branded promotional materials 31% 13% 38% 18%
Blog posts by healthcare professionals 68% 7% 18% 7%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Service provider respondents reported provision levels

closely in line with those reported by pharma respondents.
The greatest discrepancy between the two was in the
provision of CME and drug detail aids, with significantly
lower levels of involvement indicated by respondents
from service providers than from pharma.
20
Do you think you need more or better access

to the following types of medical content?
Healthcare professionals (Fig.18) Yes No
Pharmaceutical company branded

22% 78%
promotional materials
Non-accredited educational resources 25% 75%
Blog posts by healthcare

26% 74%
professionals
Pharmaceutical drug detail aids 38% 62%
Mode of action video/images 42% 58%
Patient materials and tools 46% 54%
Congress and Symposia videos,

50% 50%
slides and highlights
Medicine/drug news 52% 48%
Case studies 53% 47%
Medical images 54% 46%
Accredited educational resources (CME) 54% 46%
Expert medical opinions 57% 43%
Medicine/drug data 59% 41%
Clinical trial data 63% 37%
Journal articles 64% 36%
Diagnostic tools 66% 34%
Treatment guidelines 70% 30%
Treatment strategies 71% 29%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
At least half of all HCP survey participants reported needing

more/better access to 12 of the 18 types of content listed.
Over 70% reported needing more/better access to ‘treatment
strategies’ and ‘treatment guidelines’, while ‘pharmaceutical
company branded promotional materials’ were cited as being in
least need of improved access.
Key insight
Over 70% of HCPs stated that they
want more or better access to treatment
strategies and guidelines.
21
Format and features of medical content
How important do you consider the following possible

features of medical websites and online resources?
Healthcare professionals (Fig. 19) Not important Moderately important Very important
Content search tool/facility 3% 37% 60%
Download/save as PDF function 6% 35% 59%
High number of visual illustrations

6% 43% 52%
(images / infographics)
Short synopses of key
3% 49% 48%
learnings, content or links
Ability to view all content arranged
6% 50% 45%
by disease or condition
Ability to group or arrange the
8% 48% 44%
content that is important to you
Access to content which has been
11% 45% 44%
curated by medical professionals
Printable format 14% 45% 41%
Ability to view all content

10% 53% 37%
arranged by specialty area
Mobile-friendly 25% 38% 37%
Ability to save and read information

25% 43% 32%
offline later via a mobile app
Ability to upload and
29% 41% 30%
save your own content
Automatically (upon login) display
25% 47% 28%
content tailored to them
Facility to rate the content
27% 52% 21%
and see others’ ratings
Facility to read and submit comments 33% 53% 14%
Social sharing tools 55% 36% 9%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Most HCP respondents considered 15 of the 16 features listed

as being ‘moderately’ or ‘very’ important. The exception was
‘social sharing tools’, which only 45% of respondents deemed to
be important.
Of greatest importance, with over 90% of all respondents

citing these features as being ‘very’ or ‘moderately’ important,
were ‘search tools’, ‘download/save as PDF function’, ‘visual
illustrations’, ‘synopses of key content’, ‘ability to view content
by disease/condition’, ‘ability to view all content by medical
specialty’ and ‘ability to arrange/group content’.
Key insight
Less than half of HCPs thought that social media
tools were important, however over two thirds
thought rating and commenting facilities were.
22
In your experience, what proportion of online medical

resources currently offer the following features?
Healthcare professionals (Fig. 20) None Few Some Most All
Content search tool/facility 0% 8% 40% 43% 9%
Download/save as PDF function 3% 10% 43% 38% 7%

1% 15% 45% 34% 5%
Short synopses of key
1% 13% 48% 31% 6%
learnings, content or links
3% 18% 50% 25% 4%
by disease or condition
6% 22% 48% 20% 5%
content that is important to you
Access to content which has been
3% 26% 43% 24% 4%
curated by medical professionals
Printable format 2% 9% 18% 43% 8%
Ability to view all content

3% 19% 52% 22% 3%
arranged by specialty area
Mobile-friendly 8% 26% 41% 21% 4%

8% 38% 36% 13% 5%
Ability to upload and
9% 31% 39% 16% 4%
save your own content
10% 30% 41% 15% 4%
Facility to rate the content
3% 30% 47% 17% 3%
and see others’ ratings
Facility to read and submit comments 4% 34% 45% 15% 3%
Social sharing tools 8% 20% 44% 24% 4%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
A comparison of Fig.19 and Fig.20 indicates unfulfilled HCP

demand for the following features:
Visual illustrations – 52% of HCPs considered these to be very

important, however, only 39% stated that ‘most’ or ‘all’ medical
resources have this feature.
Synopses – 48% of HCPs considered these to be very

important, however, only 37% stated that ‘most’ or ‘all’ medical
resources have this feature.
View by disease/condition – 45% of HCPs considered these

‘very important’, however, only 29% stated that ‘most’ or ‘all’
medical resources have this feature.
Ability to group or arrange all content important to you –

44% considered this to be very important, however, only 25%
stated that most or all medical resources have this feature.
23
Within your area of responsibility, do you provide or fund

online resources that offer HCPs the following features?
Pharmaceutical (Fig. 21) No Yes I don’t know
Content search tool/facility 31% 49% 20%
Download/save as PDF function 16% 61% 22%

41% 49% 10%
Short synopses of key learnings,
43% 41% 16%
content or links
Ability to view all content arranged by
39% 47% 14%
disease or condition
47% 33% 20%
content that is important to them
Printable format 18% 63% 18%

45% 41% 14%
by specialty area
Mobile-friendly 22% 59% 18%

59% 12% 29%
Ability to upload and save their own
59% 20% 20%
content
49% 27% 24%
Facility to rate the content and see
59% 22% 18%
others’ ratings
Facility to read and submit comments 67% 18% 14%
Social sharing tools 57% 27% 16%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Over half of all pharma respondents reported providing or

funding online resources for HCPs that offer ‘printable format,
‘download or save as PDF function’ and that are ‘mobile
friendly’. These features were considered to be ‘moderately
important’ or ‘very important’ by at least three quarters of HCP
survey respondents (see Fig.19).
Less than half of pharma respondents reported providing ‘high

number of visual illustrations’ (considered important by 94% of
HCP respondents), ‘short synopses of key learnings, content or
links’ (considered important by 97% of HCP respondents) and
the ‘ability to group or arrange content that is important to them’
(considered important by 92% of HCP respondents).
Fewer than one third of pharma survey respondents reported

that they provided social features such as sharing, comment
or rating facilities. While these features were considered
less important by HCPs than most other features listed, 45%
still considered them to be ‘moderately important’ or ‘very
important’.
24
Devices used to access medical content
On average, approximately how much time

do you spend accessing online medical content
via the following devices each day?
100% 2% 5+ hours
4% 5% 4%
6% 2%
1% 3–4 hours
4% 1% 5%
5% 6%
90% 2–3 hours
5% 5% 1–2 hours
9%
10%
10%
30–60 minutes
80%
10% 10%
Less than 30 minutes
None
70% 16%
17%
20%
13%
60%
20%
50%
22%
20%
26%
40%
21%
31%
30%
20%
31%
10%
14% 33% 41% 31% 38%

0%
Home computer Workplace Workplace Mobile / cell phone Tablet device
or laptop computer / laptop computer / laptop (e.g. iPad)
– not shared – shared
More HCPs reported accessing online medical content

via home computer or laptop (86%) than via mobile phone
(69%), personal workplace computer (67%), tablet device
(62%) or shared workplace computer (59%).
While more HCPs reported using mobile devices than

workplace computers to access medical content, they also
reported spending less time doing so.
Fewer than 20% of HCP respondents reported spending

more than 2 hours per day accessing medical content via
any one type of device.
Key insight
HCPs reported spending most time using a
home computer to access medical content,
and more reported using a mobile phone
than a personal workplace computer.
25
How do you think your usage of the

following devices for work purposes
has changed over the last 12 months?
100% Increased significantly
Increased slightly
14% 12% 11%
90% Stayed the same
18% 18% Reduced slightly
Reduced significantly
80%
14%
13%
16%
70%
23%
24%
60%
50%
40%
30%
51%
20%
56%
61%
13% 9% 7% 50% 53%

10%
1% 1%
9% 7% 7% 6% 6%
0%
Home computer Workplace Workplace Mobile / cell phone Tablet device
or laptop computer / laptop computer / laptop (e.g. iPad)
– not shared – shared
More HCPs reported an increase in their use of mobile phone

(42%) and tablet device (41%) for work purposes over the past
year, than for home (27%) or workplace computers (25–28%).
Use of home-based computers showed the greatest reduction
in usage, reported by 22% of respondents.
At least half of all respondents reported no change in their

overall usage for each type of device.
26
What proportion of your online

content for HCPs is mobile-optimised?
Pharmaceutical (Fig. 24)
11% All
35% Most
31% Some
17% Little
4% None
2% I don’t know
Less than half of pharmaceutical survey respondents stated

that ‘all’ or ‘most’ of their online content for HCPs was
mobile-optimised. 21% reported that ‘little’ or ‘none’ of it was.
Do you expect that all of your online content

for HCPs will be mobile-optimised by 2016?
69% 31%
said no
said yes
More than two thirds of participants expected that all of their

online content for HCPs would be optimised by 2016.
27
Industry provision – factors affecting delivery of medical content for HCPs
How successful do you believe

your/your clients’ organisation is currently
at achieving multichannel integration?
6% Very unsuccessful
27% Unsuccessful
56% Moderately successful
5% It varies significantly
6% I don’t know
Service providers (Fig. 27)
10% Very unsuccessful
21% Unsuccessful
24% Moderately successful
1% Very successful
39% It varies significantly
4% I don’t know
61% of pharma respondents believed their organisations to

be successful at achieving multichannel integration, compared
to just 25% of service providers who believed that to be
true of their clients, with a further 39% stating that it varies
considerably.
Key insight
47% of pharma respondents reported having
an internal team dedicated to multichannel
or digital activity. Half of respondents cited
multichannel integration as a major challenge.
28
What are the main sources of digital/multichannel

expertise within your area of responsibility?
I don’t know 3%
No external expertise employed

3%
specifically for digital/multichannel
No internal expertise specifically
12%
dedicated to digital/multichannel
Freelance expertise 5%
expertise
External
Agency expertise from other
14%
industries (non-pharma)
Agency expertise from within the
44%
industry (pharma/healthcare)
Digital/multichannel training
6%
for all in-house marketers
expertise
Internal
A dedicated lead (individual)
32%
for digital/multichannel
A dedicated team for
47%
digital/multichannel
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
85% of pharma respondents reported having internal expertise

dedicated to digital or multichannel activities, with 47% having
a dedicated digital or multichannel team, 32% a dedicated
individual or ‘lead’ and 6% relying on in-house training.
Meanwhile, 63% of respondents rely on external digital or

multichannel expertise, mainly from agencies within the industry
(44%), but also agencies from outside of the industry (14%) or
freelance digital/multichannel experts (5%).
How well resourced do you think your

organisation is currently for supporting
multichannel/digital activities to support HCPs?
0% Very badly The majority of pharmaceutical company respondents

22% Badly considered their organisation to be ‘well’ or ‘very well’
64% Moderately well resourced for digital and multichannel activities, with
13% Very well 22% thinking they were badly resourced and none
reporting they were ‘very badly’ resourced.
29
To what extent do you think that the following

present a challenge to your/your clients’
HCP-focused digital activities during 2015?
Pharmaceutical (Fig.30) No challenge Minor challenge Moderate challenge Major challenge
Third party agency relationships 22% 31% 33% 13%
Technological issues 18% 38% 24% 20%
Communicating a strong
13% 31% 29% 27%
brand message
Internal expertise 9% 36% 33% 22%
Sales force (reps) integration 9% 31% 53% 7%
Aligning global and

4% 31% 31% 33%
local strategy/activity
Achieving customer centricity 2% 31% 24% 42%
Implementing an effective 40%

11% 20% 29%
social media strategy
Customer insight 11% 18% 42% 29%
Audience acquisition
4% 16% 49% 31%
for digital activities
Regulatory environment 2% 18% 44% 36%
Multichannel integration 0% 18% 33% 49%
Budget 2% 4% 44% 49%
Quantifying return on investment 0% 4% 53% 42%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Service providers (Fig. 31) No challenge Minor challenge Moderate challenge Major challenge
Third party agency relationships 10% 35% 44% 11%
Technological issues 1% 34% 46% 18%
Communicating a strong
1% 30% 48% 21%
brand message
Internal expertise 7% 21% 42% 30%
Sales force (reps) integration 3% 32% 44% 21%
Aligning global and

6% 25% 41% 28%
local strategy/activity
Achieving customer centricity 0% 13% 39% 48%
Implementing an effective
1% 17% 31% 51%
social media strategy
Customer insight 3% 15% 54% 28%
Audience acquisition
0% 8% 44% 48%
for digital activities
Regulatory environment 1% 25% 38% 35%
Multichannel integration 0% 11% 27% 62%
Budget 0% 7% 48% 45%
Quantifying return on investment 0% 6% 39% 55%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
At least half of pharmaceutical survey The greatest challenges, reported by Service provider respondents
respondents cited 12 of the 14 factors over 90%, were financial – ‘budget’ and demonstrated a good understanding of
listed as being a ‘moderate’ or ‘major’ ‘quantifying return on investment’, while the challenges that their pharmaceutical
challenge to their HCP-focused digital ‘third party agency relationships’ and clients face with HCP-focused activities,
activities. ‘technological issues’ were considered though tending to view them as bigger
to be either a ‘minor’ or ‘no’ challenge challenges than the pharmaceutical
by over half of respondents. responses indicate.
30
Please complete the following sentence:

The key to effectively reaching and engaging
healthcare professionals online is…
Industry (Fig.32)
Content “presenting content

79% that is of high quality
and directly relevant
to their daily practice”
Accessibility
39%
“independent
Credibility “providing simple,
non-branded 23% relevant and easy
unbiased content” to use resources”
Experience
19%
“convincing them that

it won’t be like every
other pharmaceutical
online experience”
This illustration is based on both word frequency and interpretation of respondent language.
It should therefore be viewed more as visual representation than a scientific one.
31
Accessibility
Experience
Credibility
Responses informing Fig.32
Content
Providing them with concise, unbiased, unbranded data/promotional materials and making sure the information is relevant in the day-to-day activities
Content
Providing credible content which adds value to the professional interest of the HCP
Multichannel effectiveness together with engagement analytics to check this effectiveness
Be relevant
Awareness of the HCP, innovation and clarity of the information displayed and accessibility to that information
Timely topics of interest presented by leading KOLs
Accurate, credible, up-to-date, easy to find and navigate and for everyday POC info - bitesized, for more indepth personal development needs to be engaging
Relevance, timeliness, and keeping it short
To think about the needs of the HCP, not the needs of pharma
Providing content that is truly meaningful to them within regulatory boundaries
Presentation impact and rep capacity to understand what HCP needs
Data
Providing easy access to contextually relevant information and tools that help them in clinical practice, and help deliver
improved health outcomes without bombarding them with irrelevant advertising messages
Know where they are, what they want, how they want it and when they want it
Reach, frequency, power, and impact
Understanding the customers desired digital experience
Achieving the dual objectives of providing convenience (ready access, minimal effort) for the HCP and delivering trustworthy information
Independent non branded unbiased content
Offer subjects of their interest with minimal inconvenience and that consume minimal time
Relevance
Understanding their needs and habits, i.e. less assumption on their practices and more insight into what they actually do and think
Delivering your brand/educational message using independent channels that HCPs use and value rather than trying to divert
HCP traffic to pharma-sponsored services that HCPs do not use or trust
Making it simple. Making it relevant. Making it useful
Via search engines. Over 80% of HCP look for info there first
Providing them with the information they need in easy to use formats. Supporting them in digital alphabetization and
use of the different technological tools of value for them. Real multichannel integration from customer point of view
Transparency, simplicity (of access) and relevancy. Its the same as it always was: good relevant content that provides a service/contributes to their needs
Convincing them that it won't be like every other pharmaceutical online experience
Providing simple, relevant and easy to use resources
Making the platform interactive for them
High-value, innovative accredited CME
Meeting their needs with credible up-to-date high-quality content
Understanding what information is really their top priority and how/where they want to access it
Treat them as we ourselves, as consumers, expect to be treated
Finding the right balance between push & pull, pharma-owned & 3rd party, & promo vs medical & service - & achieving the right frequency of this mix of channels
Identifying where they're already visiting and developing content which will encourage them to contribute
Convince them it's not losing of time
Presenting content that is of high quality and directly relevant to their daily practice
To provide patient/disease insights, practical support and solutions
Think like a customer, not a supplier
Understanding their needs and responding with information and/or services of genuine value to them in the moment of need
Providing value in a consistent way that builds trust and gives the HCP ROI on their time invested with your materials.
This means the content needs to be the right information in the right channel... the right time is whenever they need it
Tailor content to meet HCPs needs, and accept that the brand message will be diluted
To ensure content is relevant, up to date and concise
Choosing the right format at the right time for the right audience, then delivering that message in an effective way
To engage them, get them actively 'buying-in' to the initiative and actively providing feedback
Quality content
A matter of what you have to say. Content is king!
Write high quality content that is informative and accessible
Relevance
To give them something that is easy to access, as compact as possible, of interest to them, for free, from a recognised and credible source
A holy grail that requires a lifetime of faith and may still go unrewarded
Creating real value for them before the brand
Making it easy for them to access information that adds value to them....when they need it, via their preferred channel, device
Right content, right time, right place in an easily consumable format to meet their constantly changing needs and time pressures
Ensuring the content is of value and being delivered in a format useful to the HCP
Online training tools and tools easy to use
Acting on real world data not "gut feel" product led marketing
To present good scientific and well promoted data
Still very difficult as a pharmaceutical company
Attractive application with useful information
High value disease state specific information, e.g. outcomes / HECON data from an accredited third party source - peer reviewed and published study
Adapted content in the right place to be read
To have the right channel and right content for them
Delivering value from their perspectives not pharmas
Understanding what they really want
To answer their scientific and practices needs
Awareness, ease of access and trust of the information
Relevance of content, and appropriateness of context
Providing them with tools they want and can use
Understanding their needs and making it easy
To be relevant and bring differentiated value (content, user experience)
Pertinence
To provide the right content, to the right customer, via the right channel, at the right time
Fresh relevant content
To find out the right content for each audience
Cover their needs with relevant information
To make sure you're continuously gaining insight into where your target audience is searching for medical information and ensuring your information is present in those online
channels and making sure easy and fast access
Offer contents and services, unbiased and reliable for them, in a clean and clear environment, from the main medical sources, to give them solutions in information access
Trust
Tailored content
Incorporate Gaming and using Medico-Socio gaming mechanisms to kindle HCP interests
To deliver the most useful/innovative/personalized content via the best tools with on- and offline access that add value to their daily practice
Personalised content, mobile adapted, easy to use, relevant and gamified
To ensure a full intergrated multichannel strategy and a better targeting
Credibility
Find the appropriate channel, ensure technical robustness, offer a broad variety of topics to meet each customer´s needs
Have an attractive content at the correct moment
Understanding what they need and delivering it through multiple channels they utilise. Finding an enticing way to engage the healthcare professional
Providing relevant content, at the right time...
Relevance
To keep them and their patients needs at the centre of development
To communicate needed, complete (unbiased) and accurate scientific information consistently over a longer time period (several years)
32
HCPs – factors affecting consumption of medical content
How frequently do you seek medical information

online under the following circumstances?
100% Frequently (daily)

27% 26% 19% 11% 9% 16%
Frequently (weekly)
Occasionally (monthly)
16%
26% Rarely (yearly)
38% Never
80%
33%
34% 29%
43%
34%
60%
18%
20% 31%
40%
24%
22% 8% 17%
25%
20% 22%
7%
9%
13%
5% 9%
6%
4%
0%
In your own time Whenever you In a scheduled Before the patient During the patient After the patient
(outside of work have a few time during consultation consultation consultation
hours) minutes to spare work hours
HCP respondents reported most frequently accessing medical

information online during their own time, with 70% doing so at
least once per week. This compares to 60% who reported doing
so in spare work time, 52% during scheduled work time, 54%
after a patient consultation, 25% during a patient consultation
and 37% before a patient consultation. Respondents were least
likely to access online medical information during a patient
consultation, with 45% reporting they ‘rarely’ or ‘never’ do so.
33
How much influence do the following factors have

over your decision to access an online resource?
Healthcare professionals (Fig. 34) No influence Low influence Moderate influence High influence
Sponsor (who funded it) 28% 38% 26% 9%
The format or layout 9% 39% 41% 10%
Editorial board (who reviewed it) 12% 32% 38% 18%
Secure platform (registration required) 17% 25% 40% 18%
Whether it is accredited or not (CME) 14% 25% 41% 20%
Ranking in search engine results 13% 25% 41% 20%
The platform provider or publisher (source) 8% 21% 42% 28%
Author (who wrote it) 9% 19% 50% 21%
Recommendation from colleagues,

9% 19% 45% 27%
employer or institution
Cost (whether it is free to access or not) 6% 17% 21% 56%
Convenience (ease and speed of access) 5% 13% 32% 50%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
To what extent do you think the following factors

influence HCPs’ decisions to access online resources?
Pharmaceutical (Fig. 35) No influence Low influence Moderate influence High influence
Secure platform for HCPs

4% 27% 51% 18%
(registration required)

4% 10% 24% 61%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
34
To what extent do you think the following factors

influence HCPs’ decisions to access online resources?
Service providers (Fig. 36) No influence Low influence Moderate influence High influence
Secure platform for HCPs

1% 23% 52% 24%
(registration required)

1% 7% 37% 55%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
At least half of all HCP (Fig.34) respondents considered all of

the factors listed, except the ‘sponsor’, as being of ‘moderate’ to
‘high’ influence over their decision to access an online resource.
Reported as most influential were ‘convenience’ and ‘cost’, with
at least half of respondents considering them of ‘high’ influence.
Industry respondents significantly overestimated the levels of

influence that many factors have over HCPs’ decisions to access
online medical content.
65% of pharmaceutical respondents (Fig.35) and 43% of

those from service providers (Fig.36) believed that ‘whether it
is accredited or not’ would be considered of ‘high’ influence
by HCPs, while just 20% of HCPs reported that to be the
case. Likewise, 61% of pharma and 59% of service provider
respondents thought the ‘content author’ would be of ‘high’
influence, while just 21% of HCPs reported that to be the case.
Industry respondents correctly identified ‘cost’ and

‘convenience’ as being among the greatest influences
over HCP decisions to access online content, and identified
‘sponsor’ and ‘format’ among the least influential factors.
Service providers were closer overall than pharmaceutical

respondents in predicting the levels of influence that various
factors have over HCPs’ decisions to access online content.
Key insight
HCPs reported cost and convenience as the
most influential factors when deciding to
access an online resource, and the sponsor
as the least influential.
35
Are you willing to supply providers of medical content

with additional information about yourself if it helps
them to supply content tailored to your specific needs?
Most doctors (63%) are willing to supply providers
63% 37%
of medical content with information about
themselves if it results in the supply of content
better tailored to their specific needs.
said no
said yes
In general, how would you describe

the following in relation to the medical
content that you find online?
100% Excellent
11% 9% 7% 8% 10%
Good
39% 37%
Average
39%
38%
42% Poor
Very poor
80%
Very variable
60%
35%
39%
39%
32%
31%
40%
Approximately half of HCP

20%
7% 1%
1%
respondents described the
5% 3% 1% 17% ‘quality’, ‘format’, ‘types’,
5%
0%
0%
1% 13% ‘sources’ and ‘availability’
10% 10%
9% of online medical content as
0%
being ‘good’ or ‘excellent’.
Quality Format Types Sources Availability
(credibility and (how the (the range of (the publishers (ease of location
reliability) information is information) or providers) and access)
delivered)
36
In general, what level of credibility and trust do you

associate with the following sources of medical content?
100% Very high

27% 15% 4% 3% 3%
10% 8% High
16%
Medium
25% Low
36%
27% Very low
80%
48%
43%
26%
60%
44%
29%
40%
38%
23%
26%
20%
21%
12%
10%
4% 3%
0% 0%
Content reviewed Content prepared Resources Resources Resources that do

by a leading by a professional funded by a sponsored by not clearly state
medical expert medical writer pharmaceutical pharmaceutical who funded, wrote
in the field grant (with no companies (with or reviewed them
involvement in both funding and
content) involvement in
the content)
HCP survey respondents indicated that ‘content reviewed by

a leading medical expert in the field’ and/or ‘prepared by a
professional medical writer’ were associated with the highest
levels of trust and credibility.
The medical content that HCP respondents reported trusting

least was that which does not clearly disclose either the author,
the reviewer or the source of funding, with 64% assigning
‘low’ or ‘very low’ credibility to such content. HCPs were more
divided in their views on the credibility of resources prepared
with ‘funding and involvement’ from pharmaceutical companies,
with half assigning them ‘low’ or ‘very low’ credibility and
the other half assigning them ‘very high’, ‘high’ or ‘medium’
credibility.
37
What is your greatest frustration with

accessing the information you need online?
Cost “most of high quality

28% information
is by paying”
“articles that are

Accessibility
password protected 26%
or locked”
Finding “the time it

relevant takes to filter
content to access what
is required”
26%
Time
consumption
20%
“filtering information
to most relevant” Credibility
9% “lots of inaccurate
information in
some websites”
This illustration is based on both word frequency and interpretation of respondent language.
It should therefore be viewed more as visual representation than a scientific one.
38
Responses informing Fig.40
Finding relevant content

Time consumption
Accessibility
Credibility
Cost
When you don't find any
Velocity of research tools
Time consuming
Delay
Any time we are faced with difficulties by accessing online
Paywalls
Free papers
The trust I work in blocks certain sites that would be useful and so have to look them up at home if they are relevant to my area of work
The time it takes to filter to access what is required
Most of high quality information is by paying
Not enough time
Finding what I need and not being able to have free access
Long search, finding source and year of publication
Credibility
Trust
Out of date links. Paying for subscriptions. Abstracts, but unable to download full articles.
Massive documents that nobody is ever going to read - edited highlights would be better
Time, correct subject title. Professional accessibility
Method of access very variable and often confusing
Not enough time
Access online with password
Not reliable
Ease of finding peer reviewed reliable information
Cost of quality publications, that has no proportion with my income
Most of the valuable site can only be accessed via Universities links. Your access to these sites is blocked after graduation. Most of them will be
available at a cost. Hospital based sites are limited and take a very long time to open, and makes you think it not worth it for that particular time
Time if it's very lengthy with so many details like so many references. Cost at times being professional in developing country for example
it may not be possible to attend some of the conferences even if they may be quite beneficial. Probably you can not get all such information online
I always query dosage and formats according to age given that I see patients from different countries having medicines which are quite different from
what I’m used to. Thus sometimes it is hard to find the particular brand and format e.g. syrup or capsules to arrive at the correct dose. An example
would be for the antibiotic Augmentin - some countries still have the old formulation and dose of 375mg every 8 hours; others have the Augmentin Duo
with 2 times a day and 675mg tabs; Other only the forte tabs with 1g tabs...
It would be helpful to have a database that searches within other databases and gives you what you are searching for!!! That is the dream we have now
that we are living in the NEW Millenium with such advanced technology :-)
Getting rid of junk and non-medical sites
Weeding through to find the most appropriate/accurate information
Availability offline
Access/login/cost
Difficulty to reach the right website
Cost in terms of money and time and opportunity cost (lost client revenue) to do all the CPD I would like, ideally, to be able to do
Not many free websites for students who can't afford
Too much information to choose from
I haven't a password
Correct information
Time
Access to subscription only materials
Being able to download it because then immediately a sign in or cost factor comes in
When the medical websites required registration
Articles that are not open access or accessible via our national journal service
39
Finding relevant content

Time consumption
Accessibility
Credibility
Cost
Having to pay high price for individual papers to download
Lots of inaccurate information in some websites
Sorting through journals and articles to find one or two relevant to the information I need
Hospital firewall
Need to find most current material first
Filtering information to most relevant
Hard to find info and slow websites search engines
Time
Some articles are not accessible for free
Paywalls
When the "teaser" looks promising and then you either get no access or the content is not worth looking
I had to create a custom Google search to index and then allow me to quickly search across a multitude of credible sources - and tabs (like filters) to
select topics or sources of interest. Then I don’t have to go to multiple sites or page through dross search results!
https://cse.google.com/cse/publicurl?cx=012082996335504419280:lppedmktwyi. I also aggregate RSS feeds on reps.pro from credible sources to get
abstracts and excerpts of latest regulatory information on my iPhone. Quick and easy
Price
Most of the time I could not find the exact information I’m looking for. And regarding to medical images, such as microscopic appearance of some
microorganisms, or specific information on laboratory diagnosis, it is very difficult find studies and ways of work in the different hospitals and countries.
It could be useful as training on how to search and where to search for specific info
Not easy to spot exactly what I need sometimes
Articles that are password protected or locked
Not finding topics immediately
When important access needs payment OR restricted
Not being able to download articles that are known to be relevant (or more detailed synopses) of interest. I understand we need journals and journals
need income to produce them, and research needs funding too, but free commons would be great for practitioners
No immediate access to full text article from different medical publications
A lot of the time I don't know where I can get the information
Language
Excess info not needed and ads
Ease and cost of access
To pay for the article before you can download it - takes time
Expensive articles. Blocked access
Slow connection
Finding unbiased information from trusted organisations
Too much, too little
Not enough time
If they are not available
Variability in information, few images, sometimes cost
Difficult to get specific articles from even University and pubmed databases. I have to jump around. The best website that is free and often better than
any other is freefullpdf.com. I would like you to assist this group in advertising on their website or whatever so it does not go out of business. Another
database that is useful but too expensive for what it delivers is www.curehunter.com. There is no place that will pull all of the literature together like
this website. They don’t have enough alternative and complementary data so mostly what you get are pharmaceutical therapies at a cost of $25.00.
For a while they charged $5.00 so I did it on about every patient but at $25.00 I have not done any searches for at least a year. They could use some
support so as to offer their services more cheaply
Can only read article synopsis, not entire article
Credible sources
Having to read through lots of sites when I Google questions before I can locate the correct information which I really want to read
Going right to the information instead of having so many search engine
Cost of reliable sources to journals, apps, etc
Cost of some articles
Payment
Incomplete abstracts of articles available for purchase
40
About the HCP respondents
Please select your core medical speciality

and any other areas of interest
Healthcare
professionals
(Fig.41)
7% of HCP respondents were general practitioners or primary

care physicians with the remaining 93% ranging across over 30
other medical specialties.
41
About the HCP respondents
In which decade were you born?
Healthcare professionals (Fig. 42) Before 1950s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s onwards
4% 29% 33% 25% 9% 0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
One third of HCP survey respondents were born before 1960 (over
55 years) and one third were born after 1970 (under 45 years).
What is your gender?
Two thirds of HCP survey

33% 67%
respondents were male.
Where are you located?
Europe
58%
Asia Pacific
5%
North America
21%
Africa / Middle East
11%
Latin America
11%
Over half of HCP respondents were based in Europe and one fifth based in North America.
42
About the Industry respondents
What type of organisation d

o you work for?
Industry (Fig. 45)
48% Pharmaceutical company Of the 140 pharmaceutical industry professionals

19% Medical communications agency that participated in this study, 48% worked for
10% Media or advertising agency a pharmaceutical company and the remainder
9% Consultancy worked for other organisations, primarily medical
5% Medical publisher communications agencies (19%), media agencies
4% Technology provider (10%) or in consultancy (9%).
1% Medical device company
2% Other
Where are you located?

Industry (Fig. 46)
Europe
57%
North America
32%
Rest of the World

11%
Over half of industry respondents were based in Europe.
What is your geographical area of responsibility?

Industry (Fig. 47) Pharmaceutical Service provider
40% 41%
30%
30%
29%
24%
23%
20%
14%
10% 12%
10%
6%
3% 4%
2% 2%
0% 0%
Global Regional: Regional: National: National: National: National:

Europe/EMEA outside of Europe a European United States a South American an Asia Pacific
(e.g. Asia Pacific, country or Canada country country
South America)
Among pharma respondents, over half had global or regional Among respondents from service providers, a higher
responsibility, with the remainder being responsible for a percentage had global (41%) or regional (30%) responsibility,
national market. with fewer (28%) having national responsibility.
43
About the Industry respondents
What type of role do you personally perform?
34% Commercial – Marketing Most pharma respondents reported being

21% Digital/technology in a commercial role (34% performing
14% Medical a marketing function), while 21% had
9% Commercial – Business Development/ a digital/technological role and 14% a
Sales/Account Management
medical one.
8% Strategist
4% Communications
3% Commercial – Market Access
1% Procurement
1% Consultant
6% Other
In which decade were you born?
Industry (Fig. 49) Before 1950s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s onwards
Service
providers 4% 13% 34% 31% 15% 3%
Pharmaceutical
0% 13% 40% 33% 11% 2%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Respondents from service providers covered a slightly broader and

more evenly distributed age range than those from pharma. For pharma,
73% were born between 1960 and 1980 (35–55 years) versus 65% for
service providers.
What is your gender?

Industry (Fig.50)
Both industry groups were formed

more of male than female respondents. Service providers
Two thirds of all respondents were male. 39% 61%
Pharmaceutical
36% 64%
44
Conclusions
Channels and
sources of medical
information (where)
Websites
HCPs have most trust for society and institutional websites
but they access independent websites most frequently, with
over half reporting doing so at least once per week. 80% find
independent websites of moderate or significant value and
over half reported wanting better access to them. Conversely,
HCPs reported accessing pharmaceutical websites (both brand
and educational) the least – less than one quarter reported
doing so at least once per week, with over half of respondents
citing lack of interest, credibility and trust as their main
deterrents. Pharma respondents demonstrated that they know
their websites lack value for HCPs, although they did slightly
Pharmaceutical representatives
overestimate the value of their educational websites (with
This study indicates that Industry professionals 19% believing HCPs find them very valuable, compared to just
overestimate the value that HCPs hold for pharmaceutical 9% of HCPs who stated that was the case). Nevertheless,
representatives (reps). Over three quarters of pharma over half of pharma respondents stated that their websites
respondents believed that HCPs attribute moderate to high continue to play a moderate or major role in the delivery of
value to reps as a source of medical information, while less medical content.
than half of HCPs reported finding them valuable. Lack of
interest, trust and time accounted for three quarters of HCPs Most industry respondents reported working with independent
not seeing reps more frequently than they do. Nevertheless, medical websites to provide content for HCPs – 75% for CME,
Industry respondents reported that the sales force continues over half for congress or symposium reports/video, webcasts/
to be their most significant channel for delivery of medical webinars and banner campaigns and 40% for non-accredited
information to HCPs. educational content. The majority (over 70%) reported
performance as moderately or very successful and 95% report
Analysis – As pharma and their customers work in the overall experience as positive or satisfactory.
an increasingly digital world, the role of sales reps
needs to evolve to avoid further decline in their levels Analysis – Industry’s reliance on its own websites may
of access and value. Time and trust are issues that need be responsible in part for its difficulties engaging with
to be overcome, and a virtual presence by technology- doctors online. Building a platform and audience from
savvy reps is likely to become increasingly important scratch can be a huge drain on resources and limited
in maintaining welcome engagement. in success, not to mention having a negative impact
on reputation and trust according to HCP respondents
(with over one third citing lack of transparency and trust
as the reason for not accessing pharma websites more
frequently). Positioning accredited and non-accredited
content alongside independent sources of valuable
and credible information may achieve higher levels of
engagement and trust, especially when that content is
written or reviewed by leading experts and independent of
the Industry funder.
45
Conclusions
Channels and
sources of medical
information (where)
Print
Printed materials continue to be important, with 81% of
HCP respondents placing moderate or high value on these
and 60% stating that they require better access. However,
only 68% of industry respondents reported that they are
supplying HCPs with medical content via print.
Analysis – Industry provision of printed materials

appears to have dropped below HCP demand, which
remains high. Traditional learning methods are not dead
yet, however lack of time is the main obstacle reported
by one third of HCP respondents for not accessing print
Social media materials more frequently, so this does impact the
Industry respondents believed social media to be of greater potential for industry to support HCPs in this way.
value to HCPs than HCP respondents reported to be the
case. HCPs cited social media as their least important
source of medical content, with almost half placing ‘no’ or
‘limited’ value on general social media platforms (such as
Facebook and Twitter). Professional networks/forums were
significantly more valued (67% moderate to high) and over
half of HCPs reported that they would like better access to
these platforms.
Analysis – While social media isn’t viewed by HCPs

with the same importance as other dedicated channels
for the delivery of medical information, its value is
reportedly increasing. HCP usage is not at the level that
many in the industry are led to believe, but it should
not be dismissed altogether – usage is still growing,
and done in the right way (primarily in a professional
setting) social media can form an important part of any
Live events (conferences and meetings)
multichannel engagement strategy.
Over three quarters of HCPs considered live events to be
moderately or very important channels of notification and
61% wanted better access to them, but they cited cost
and lack of time as the main obstacles to access.
Analysis – Pharma is investing heavily in live events

and this is welcomed by HCPs. However, the challenges
of time and cost are significant obstacles to overcome
if all stakeholders are to benefit fully. Virtual events
are one cost-effective option, while placing enduring
materials from live events online, where it is free and
convenient for a wider audience to access over time,
can significantly increase engagement and ROI.
46
Conclusions
Time and place (when, where)
HCPs are most likely to access online medical content in their own
time (70% doing so at least once per week, 27% daily) than during
any other part of their day including before (25%), during (37%)
or after patient consultations (54%). They are increasingly using
multiple devices daily to access medical content, with 86% using a
home computer or laptop, 69% using a mobile phone, 62% a tablet
device, 67% a personal workplace computer and 59% a shared
workplace computer.
Fewer than 20% of HCPs reported spending more than 2 hours

per day on any one type of device. Mobile device usage is almost
on a par with use of work computers and while the duration is
Types of medical shorter, it is increasing. While most doctors are using at least one
mobile device daily, industry is not yet catering fully to their mobile
content (what) requirements. Less than half of pharma respondents reported that
their online content was all mobile-optimised, and only two thirds
expected it to be so by 2016.
At least half of all HCP survey participants Analysis – This study implies that HCP access to online content
reported needing more or better access for work purposes is ubiquitous and increasingly multi-device,
to 14 of the 18 types of content listed. both at work and at home. Industry needs to ensure that their
audiences’ experience is good regardless of device or for how
long HCPs are accessing their online medical content.
These included treatment strategies and guidelines, diagnostic
tools, journal articles, clinical trial data, drug data, expert
medical opinions, CME, medical images, case studies and
video/slides from congress/symposia. These are all types of
content that industry can (and does) help to supply, however
over 30% of pharma respondents do not support provision of
several of these types of content. Format and features (how)
Industry respondents reported being heavily focused on the
supply of ‘pharmaceutical company branded promotional
The exponential growth in provision and access of online content
materials’ (84% doing so), while 55% of HCPs reported
has led to a quick evolution in the formats and features used in
never or rarely accessing them, and the majority do not want
the presentation of this content. HCP responses indicated clear
improved access to these types of content.
and strong demand for a range of features that improve their user
experience and indicate that lack of these features has an impact on
Analysis – HCPs are accessing credible, unbranded
‘convenience’, which is cited as a significant obstacle to accessing
educational content frequently, and branded promotional
most types of content.
material less so. This study indicates a lack of correlation
between HCP demand and industry supply of medical
Over 90% of HCPs surveyed viewed the following as ‘very’ or
content. Industry is under-supporting the types of content
‘moderately’ important: search tools, download/PDF function,
that HCPs access most frequently and oversupplying the
visual illustrations, synopses of key content, ability to view content
types of content that they access least frequently.
by disease or specialty and the ability to arrange or group content
they like. However, fewer than half of HCPs stated that most or
all resources contained such features or formats. This indicates
a significant gap between current demand and supply. Industry
responses reinforce this, with less than two thirds stating that
they supply content with such features.
Analysis – Industry needs to put significantly more emphasis

on the format of the online medical content that it provides for
HCPs; the importance of format should not be underestimated.
Medical content that provides a valuable and convenient user
experience for HCPs will help them in practice and attract better
engagement and trust. The message is clear: ‘Make it easy to
access, digest and save’.
47
About EPG Health Media
About EPG Health Media
This report
was published by
EPG Health Media
in October 2015
EPG Health Media publishes
www.epgonline.org, the independent
website for healthcare professionals.
epgonline.org provides healthcare professionals

in Europe and worldwide with access to disease and
treatment information, carefully curated from reputable
sources and presented by disease topic. The website
contains more than 110,000 pages of clinical content
and attracts over half a million active users.
Via epgonline.org, EPG Health Media works with

pharmaceutical and other healthcare organisations
to reach and engage target audiences online with
educational content.
EPG Health Media (Europe) Ltd

Royal Victoria House
51 – 55 The Pantiles
Tunbridge Wells
Kent TN2 5TE United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0)1892 526776

Web: www.epghealthmedia.com
Twitter: @epghealthmedia
Blog: epghealthmedia.com/blog
48
EPG Health Media (Europe) Ltd
Royal Victoria House
51 – 55 The Pantiles
Tunbridge Wells
Kent TN2 5TE United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0)1892 526776

Web: www.epghealthmedia.com
Twitter: @epghealthmedia
Blog: epghealthmedia.com/blog

Pharma HCPEngagement Report - vs01

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pharma HCPEngagement Report - vs01

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pharmaceutical

Channels for Industry delivery 08 Types of medical content 18

Within your area of responsibility, do you provide

How would you describe your overall experience

Industry provision – factors affecting delivery of 28

How successful do you believe your/your

What are the main sources of digital/

How well resourced do you think your

HCPs – factors affecting consumption 33 About the Industry respondents 43

In general, how would you describe the

In general, what level of credibility and trust

What is your greatest frustration with accessing

The majority of today’s

This means that most qualified since the Internet went

Today, to effectively reach and engage with their HCP

‘Digital’ currently accounts for approximately only 15%

To deliver true customer-centricity, pharma marketers

The purpose of this study is to shed light on the current

The objectives of this study

• Where is Industry placing its content for HCPs?

Types of content (what?)

• What content types is Industry supplying for HCPs?

Format & features (how?)

Supply versus demand • Types of content to support or provide for

• Uncover Industry awareness of HCP demands • Multichannel strategy approaches

• Understanding opportunities for better

• Challenging or supporting decisions around

• Organisational change management related

This report is based on

Every effort has been taken to ensure that the study

The study is based on surveys conducted with two target

Note: results are reliable

Target respondents Medically qualified healthcare professionals (validated through

Respondent source epgonline.org database of healthcare professionals

Sample size 216

Survey language English

Survey period July–August 2015

Survey method Emailed link to an online (web based) survey

Sampling Random, voluntary (no honoraria), no control group

Pharmaceutical industry professionals

Target respondents Pharmaceutical companies and their service providers (agencies)

Respondent Source EPG Health Media database, Pharmaphorum database,

Sample size 137 (66 pharmaceutical, 71 service provider)

Survey language English

Survey period July–August 2015

Survey method Emailed link to an online survey

Sampling Random, voluntary (no honoraria), no control group

Report response key

Channels for delivery

This highlights areas where pharma

In general, what value do you attribute to

General social platforms

Wikipedia 20% 39% 29% 12%

Meetings with pharmaceutical

Video channels 15% 38% 42% 5%

Pharmaceutical brand websites 13% 40% 39% 8%

Medical apps 14% 29% 45% 12%

Webcasts and webinars 11% 31% 47% 11%

Pharmaceutical educational websites 9% 35% 47% 9%

Exhibition halls at conferences 9% 27% 49% 15%

Email announcements and newsletters 5% 29% 51% 15%

Professional social networks and

Independent medical websites 4% 16% 54% 26%

Supply versus demand • Types of content to support or provide for

• Uncover Industry awareness of HCP demands • Multichannel strategy approaches

• Understanding opportunities for better

• Challenging or supporting decisions around

• Organisational change management related

Target respondents Medically qualified healthcare professionals (validated through

Target respondents Pharmaceutical companies and their service providers (agencies)

Respondent Source EPG Health Media database, Pharmaphorum database,