Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42622995›Full record

ArticlePharmaceutical medicine2026

Empowering Medical Affairs Professionals in Their Critical Role in Integrated Evidence Generation Planning.

Judith Nelissen, Angela Williams, Cerise James, Gary Male

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Judith NelissenAstellas Pharma Europe BV, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Angela WilliamsKyowa Kirin International, Global Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Marlow, UK.
Cerise JamesTilghman James Group LLC, Medical Affairs, Tilghman, MD, USA.
Gary MaleOxford PharmaGenesis Ltd, Tubney Warren Barn, Tubney, Oxford, OX13 5QJ, UK. gary.male@pharmagenesis.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0357-3707

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An integrated evidence generation plan (IEGP) can transform the effectiveness of how pharmaceutical companies demonstrate the value of new therapies. Medical Affairs professionals are uniquely positioned to lead and shape an IEGP, leveraging their scientific and clinical expertise, while maintaining a focus on patient access needs among competing cross-functional priorities. In this article, we explore key subfunctions within Medical Affairs, describing their contributions to the development of an IEGP and discussing the impact of the evolving healthcare environment on their responsibilities. Finally, we consider how to measure the impact of an IEGP for pharmaceutical companies and describe what success looks like for Medical Affairs in the development of an IEGP. Our companion article in this issue of Pharmaceutical Medicine provides more details of the process of integrated evidence generation planning and considers the impact of evolving regulatory and health technology assessment landscapes.

Indexed as

Drug IndustryEvidence-Based MedicinePower, PsychologicalProfessional RoleHumans

Identifiers

PMID42622995
PMCPMC13545031

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.