ArticlePharmaceutical medicine2026
Integrated Evidence Generation Planning: Why Medical Affairs is a Critical Partner.
Article in Pharmaceutical medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Empowering Medical Affairs Professionals in Their Critical Role in Integrated Evidence Generation Planning.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2026Article
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
In an era of rapidly evolving healthcare systems and escalating demands for value demonstration, pharmaceutical companies face unprecedented pressure to generate robust, relevant evidence for a diverse array of stakeholders. Traditional, siloed approaches to evidence generation are no longer sufficient. The development and use of integrated evidence generation plans (IEGPs) have emerged as strategic imperatives-reshaping how organisations align scientific, regulatory and patient-centred objectives across the product life cycle. The IEGPs bring together evidence-generation activities across functions and geographies, to ensure that robust evidence is delivered throughout the product life cycle. In this article, we present IEGP development as a collaborative and strategic process, which enables pharmaceutical companies to demonstrate the holistic value of a new therapy to a broader range of healthcare decision makers. We argue that Medical Affairs professionals are well positioned to lead this initiative, given their in-depth understanding of the evidence generation needs and priorities of patients and healthcare professionals; however, a close and strategic partnership with other key functions, including Market Access and Clinical Development, regions and countries, is vital to the holistic understanding of all key evidence needs and to establish the strategic differentiation required to bring new medicines to patients. Our companion article in this edition of Pharmaceutical Medicine expands on the role of specific subfunctions of Medical Affairs in the development of an IEGP; it also considers how the impact of Medical Affairs' role can be measured. Please note that in both articles we prefer to use the term 'IEGP', but the reader may also see the similar term 'IEP' (Integrated Evidence Plan) used in the literature-these terms are used interchangeably in the field.
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.