In today’s digital age there is an opportunity to present and share medical research in new and creative ways. However, traditional formats are often still our go-to methods. Following his participation at the 2023 International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) EU meeting, The Publication Plan spoke with James Dathan, Global Publications Manager at AstraZeneca, to learn why he feels it is time to challenge the status quo and how we should be striving to develop more innovative ways to communicate medical information.

With social media and various digital platforms, there are many formats available for sharing data and research. At the 2023 European Meeting of ISMPP you talked about using an omnichannel approach to communication. For anyone unfamiliar with the concept, could you explain what this means and how it differs from a multichannel approach?

“A quick Google search shows that omnichannel is referred to as ‘a neologism describing a business strategy’ while the business consulting firm Frost & Sullivan defines it as ‘seamless and effortless, high-quality customer experiences that occur within and between contact channels’. While this overview is helpful, it is trying to explain something that I do not think anyone really knows yet ─ omnichannel is a relatively new concept and what will become its defining characteristics are still evolving.”

Multichannel in my view refers to standard communication methods, such as journals, congresses, and the more traditional methods of dissemination. Omnichannel simply enhances those for the modern world where we all connect to phones, social media and e-mails whenever we want. To this end the opportunity to reach anyone, on any platform is omnipresent – we just need to pick the right platforms and the right processes. What we think of as omnichannel communication  and how we see its potential and direction may change tomorrow and certainly will in the future.”

“The opportunity to reach anyone, on any platform is omnipresent – we just need to pick the right platforms and the right processes.”

Specifically, within medical communications, what are the benefits and challenges to pharmaceutical companies adopting omnichannel strategies? Could you share any examples of this approach being utilised particularly effectively at AstraZeneca?

“Keeping pace with technological developments is a massive challenge. By the time we have identified an opportunity and started exploring, embracing, and actioning ideas, the world has moved on. So few opportunities exist for a sustained period during which we can try out new platforms (remember MySpace!). Other, more enduring areas which we can explore, such as Twitter, Facebook and TikTok are restricted by the PMCPA, our own compliance guidelines and concerns that posts may be interpreted as promotional rather than informative. Our job in publications is to bridge the gaps between the science, healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients, making information accessible, relatable, and useful for people living with illness and disease. To do this we need to challenge the status quo and overcome concerns about self-promotion. We need to work with agencies such as PMCPA and other pharmaceutical companies to share the breath-taking work being done by the scientific teams with patients, who simply want to know and understand the illnesses they are dealing with.”

At the European Meeting of ISMPP, you highlighted the need to challenge standard practices and used congress posters as an example of a format that has changed very little over time. What do you think are the main barriers to pharmaceutical companies using more innovative approaches to communication? Could you share any examples of projects that you have been involved with where new or creative ideas were used successfully?

“As with social media I think that compliance and our own caution with regards to compliance has a part to play. Moving away from familiarity takes courage and a sustained effort. I talked about Better Poster 2.0 being around for years already… where are the next evolutions, 3.0 etc? We have added features to posters such as plain language summaries (PLS) and QR codes but kept the existing format. A few years ago, when I was with an agency, I led an interactive poster project with our client and the main battle we faced was being able to present the poster differently. Of the three or four models we suggested, the safest and most familiar was selected. I didn’t even want to put this model forward as the whole point of the project was to move away from the standard format. As a result, the poster did not stand out, did not look new or innovative and the metrics were, at best, rubbish!

“To drive innovation, we need to get everyone on board from the outset, including the congresses.”

To drive innovation, we need to get everyone on board from the outset, including the congresses, as so often they insist on font size, content etc. Would a poster be so bad if it only included results and/or a conclusion with the other details sitting behind a QR code for transparency? – it may even drive more people to use the QR code!”

During the last couple of years, medical congresses had to take place virtually due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Do you feel the shift to virtual events encouraged innovation? Do you think the change in format resulted in any advantages that should continue to be incorporated at face-to-face events?

“QR codes as a way of putting content online were all the rage during COVID. However, the industry defaulted to what it so often does and decided that talking head videos would be the way forward. So, everyone did the same… Sometimes we need to ban the normal to force innovation. The pandemic forced people to finally embrace the idea of a 3-dimensional poster, where more content can sit behind it via a QR code. The idea of going further to create 4 dimensions where live discussions with the authors  take place behind the QR code can now be a real option going forward.

This could even lead to reducing the industry’s carbon footprint with fewer people travelling thousands of miles to present a poster for 15 minutes. We are in a real digital age, and we must embrace it. Yes, face-to-face interactions are crucial and have a place, but just because we can go back to face-to-face meetings, doesn’t mean that we must. It doesn’t mean that we must throw away a lot of the wider opportunities created during the pandemic and press a reset back to ‘how it’s always been’. Maybe posters should become more focused on critical and key content, with the author taking part in discussions from their  office, via a large, centrally placed QR code. Or maybe discussions could even occur via holograms through augmented reality.”

“We are in a real digital age, and we must embrace it. Yes, face-to-face interactions are crucial and have a place, but just because we can go back to face-to-face meetings, doesn’t mean that we must.”

Journals are increasingly offering additional digital features to go alongside traditional articles. How do these enhancements improve the reach and impact of research? How do you go about measuring the return on investment?

“We are currently looking at this as a team. We are redoing our metrics projects, developing what we use already from Altmetric data, and working alongside that team to develop a Share of Voice dashboard where we can access the qualitative data, aligned with our quantitative data to get a more balanced view of the impact being made by content. We encourage the industry to move away from defaulting to impact factor as the sole consideration in journal selection and push for  open access and digital support, which can make papers more accessible to a wider audience and provide a better understanding of what people are accessing and saying about our articles. This improved analysis can then drive journal selection (and subsequent review of the selection) going forward to better educate teams about the opportunities that exist outside of simply looking at impact factor.”

“We encourage the industry to move away from defaulting to impact factor as the sole consideration in journal selection.”

Patient inclusion in medical communications was another key topic at ISMPP EU. An omnichannel approach to data dissemination provides scope to reach patients via a variety of media and increase patient involvement. Have you found this to be the case? How important is this aspect of the omnichannel approach and what do you think are the key considerations when involving patients?  

“The whole point of omnichannel is to allow and encourage patients to be able to find information on both their illness and treatment options to inform and support them. That’s why we are all here, to support patients through difficult times. As I said above, omnichannel is an ever-evolving concept due to the pace of media and channel development. What we think of it today, how we see its potential and direction may change tomorrow and certainly will in the future. This point really brings together many of the questions above whereby evolution can only occur in this space if every stakeholder gets on board. One limiting area will derail it all and revert back to the tried, tested and safe standard.

We need social media guidance from the PMCPA to be available for some level of dissemination. If we created non-promotional language and informed people of everything that is available, it would become easier for patients to find research. Removing pay walls and accessibility to patients would make a huge impact too and this will only happen with companies working together to get the best outcomes for patients to be reassured, and understand the progress and options available to them.

Involving patients in the publications process is increasingly common and finally being recognised as valuable. Patient involvement allows for articles to have an empathetic and practical sense. Our language can all too often be very scientific, hard, and factual without the secondary consideration/realisation that patients will be reading our articles too, not just HCPs! Involving patients can provide a human centric approach to the writing resulting in more descriptive and informative wording and improved accuracy of language – often opening the article to more patients who will get what they came looking for from the article.”

PLS, which are recommended in the GPP 2022 update, are mandated by some pharmaceutical companies for some or all their company-sponsored research. What is the current policy on PLS at AstraZeneca? How do you think decisions should be made regarding the inclusion of PLS to maximise their benefit whilst avoiding cherry picking research?

“The simple solution is to mandate that all publications need a PLS. This is something that I think will come but needs to be done in line with PMCPA considerations regarding social media, otherwise we are once again creating a bottleneck of content without a proper and full distribution system available.

PLS are improving and becoming  much more regulated and relevant as the social media world wants bitesized, simple content to understand. Even posters are now ‘too much’ to digest for people; instead they want to access information that has been summarised in a PLS. I go back to point raised above: so much more information could sit behind a poster with QR codes or other digital mechanisms with a concise text summary of the conclusion, a PLS and some simple graphics on the poster.

We are developing PLS options with internal artificial intelligence (AI) tools at present. We have made some fantastic progress on this with posters and are keen to extend the potential to manuscripts and even develop full plain language summaries of publications (PLSPs) in the future using this potential technology. More to come!”

Looking to the future, what developments would you like to see within medical communications? Are there any areas where you feel innovations or more creative approaches may lead to significant changes to standard practices?

“We can be a creative sector of the industry. We want to be creative and be pushed harder to innovate and create. Some of the issues right now are simply that the constraints around what is seen to be ‘promotional’ are so tight that it makes it incredibly hard to be creative! There are always new ways of doing things and as an industry that is constantly innovating and pushing boundaries within science, we seem very slow to be open-minded enough to challenge the status quo within the communications space. There is so much we could do, that does not need to be promotional, but can be informative, reassuring, and supportive for patients – we just need to work collaboratively to remove obstacles and find a mutually agreeable pathway to allow more and better innovation in the publications space.”

“We can be a creative sector of the industry. We want to be creative and be pushed harder to innovate and create…..There is so much we could do, that does not need to be promotional, but can be informative, reassuring, and supportive for patients.”

James Dathan is Global Publications Manager at AstraZeneca and can be contacted via james.dathan@astrazeneca.com or LinkedIn. James Dathan is an employee of AstraZeneca. This article reflects his opinions and not necessarily those of AstraZeneca.

—————————————————–