ArticlePharmaceutical medicine2026
Best Practices for Medical Information Global Response Documents from phactMI and MILE.
Article in Pharmaceutical medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medical information departments within pharmaceutical companies play a critical role in addressing unsolicited healthcare professionals' inquires with accurate, evidence-based, and balanced medical information through scientific response documents. Global response documents (GRDs) aim to harmonize information between global and local teams and the end product, the scientific response document. To address the challenges associated with the development and maintenance of global response documents and this harmonization, phactMI and Medical Information Leaders Europe (MILE) convened an international expert panel representing 11 major pharmaceutical companies. Over months of discussion and deliberation, the panel developed consensus-based best practices for the creation and management of global response documents. The experts contributed nuanced insights regarding optimal document structure and format that consider various stakeholders while maintaining medical accuracy. Consensus was achieved via a structured survey with a 75% approval threshold for each best practice. Overall, GRDs are essential tools for pharmaceutical companies, offering accurate evidence-based responses to healthcare professionals. While companies may respond to patient inquiries as well in different formats (verbal vs written), GRDs are exclusively intended for healthcare professionals currently. Best practices for GRD development include: being focused on a single topic, developed in a label-agnostic manner, utilize the most robust scientific information available, developed up to 12-15 months prior to launch, have regular feedback in a structured approach from local teams, follow internal guidelines and work instructions, and be peer reviewed internally whenever new data are added. In addition, local response documents or scientific response documents should be based on a GRD that is localized with appropriate documentation. Overall, GRD development is a collaborative and innovative approach (including interactive formats), supported by defined metrics (including response time) and ongoing updates to ensure global relevance and compliance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.