ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2026
Benchmark Survey on Content Development and Key Performance Indicators: A phactMI Benchmarking Survey Update.
Article in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMedical Information plays a critical role in delivering accurate, evidence-based responses to unsolicited requests. At the heart of the response is the content developed by Medical Information. Additionally, the metrics and key performance indicators (KPIs) surrounding content development and delivery are necessary to gauge the utilization and impact of the content. Because the landscape has evolved significantly since the last survey in 2018, the need to re-examine content development approaches and KPIs is warranted. The objective of this benchmarking survey was to assess the evolving approach and tactics of content development and utilization of KPIs of phactMI member companies with a comparison to 2018 where applicable.
methodsIn May 2024, an electronic survey containing 71 closed and open-ended questions was distributed to 36 phactMI member companies. The survey included demographics, development of specific content, scientific response documents (SRDs), custom response documents, and metrics and KPI. Results were analyzed with descriptive statistics.
resultsMedical Information teams primarily develop content for HCPs (90%) versus patients (10%). Disease state content creation was more common among small/midsize companies (36%) than large companies (18%), though requests for such content were infrequent. Similar to 2018, SRDs remain predominantly traditional written documents (66%), with emerging use of frequently asked questions, infographics, HTML, and slide decks. Most companies (85%) maintain centralized SRD development, but the proportion without target timelines for SRD development increased from 37% in 2018 to 72% in 2024. AI adoption is in early stages, with 3 companies actively using it and 18 exploring applications, primarily for writing and paraphrasing. Omnichannel integration is reported by 59% of companies, and custom response documents account for 25% of inquiries. Similar to 2018, the most common KPIs in medical information departments include inquiry volume, turnaround time, and document updates. There is a growing emphasis on customer satisfaction and digital engagement. HCPs most frequently use email (52%) and phone (29%) for information, while digital channels remain underutilized.
conclusionThis benchmarking survey highlights the need for ongoing innovation, strategic alignment, and robust quality assurance in Medical Information content development and KPI reporting. While many things are similar to 2018, customer expectations continue to evolve and technology has advanced. Organizations must balance operational efficiency with personalized engagement, while ensuring compliance and ethical standards. For the future, the three areas to prioritize are establishing non-traditional content development formats, processes, and workflows; expanding digital and mobile optimization; and strengthening governance around AI and content reuse.
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.