Meeting report: summary of Day 2 of the 21st Annual Meeting of ISMPP
The 21st Annual Meeting of the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) took place in Washington, DC on 12–14 May. Centring on the theme ‘Diversity and Innovation: In Concert’, the meeting highlighted how uniting varied perspectives can drive creativity and progress in medical communications.
A summary of the second day of the meeting is provided below to benefit those who were unable to attend the meeting, and as a timely reminder of the key topics covered for those who did.
You can read our summary of Day 1 here; and our Day 3 summary here.
Summaries of Day 2
Keynote – Advancing health equity through inclusive communication
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- Reaching diverse populations is essential for increasing health equity. Medical publication professionals have a role in ensuring reach and accessibility of their materials, so that the existing barriers to healthcare engagement are not reinforced.
The need to build trust
Dr Lisa Fitzpatrick (Grapevine Health) started her presentation by sharing some videos of people talking on the street about what sources they trust for medical information. Instead of doctors, people are often more likely to trust online conversations and relatives; this is partly because the language that doctors use is too technical. Because of this, healthcare professionals are often failing to build links with the communities they are trying to reach with health information.
Health literacy matters
Dr Fitzpatrick reported that low health literacy costs $238 billion annually in outcomes, affecting the ability of individuals to understand and act on the healthcare information they receive. Medical communication professionals often overestimate people’s level of medical understanding, resulting in materials that are incomprehensible to the average person. Dr Fitzpatrick challenged us to think more like the people we’re trying to communicate with and less like academics. She also stressed the importance of listening and responding to feedback, so we understand the barriers that may exist to accessing the information.
Bridging the digital divide
Dr Fitzpatrick felt that the “digital divide” was too often blamed for a failure of reaching people with healthcare information. However, it is clear that people want healthcare information and are actively seeking it. She urged healthcare stakeholders to be bolder in engaging digitally, to counter the risk averse approach that has prevented engagement in online spaces.
Reaching clinical trial populations
We all recognise the importance of diversity within clinical trial populations and the need for all communities to be represented. This requires us to reach out to under-represented communities to gain the trust of patients. This should involve local primary care physicians, who have not traditionally been approached, but are best situated to build these links.
Be creative, be courageous
Dr Fitzpatrick concluded her presentation by urging medical publications professionals to be more creative and courageous in reaching patients via social media. By prioritising plain, inclusive language and health literacy principles, we can demonstrate that we are committed to communities, and can build the trust needed to help people achieve better health engagement and outcomes.
By prioritising plain, inclusive language and health literacy principles, we can demonstrate that we are committed to communities, and can build the trust needed to help people achieve better health engagement and outcomes.
A chorus of voices: the power of representation in the medical research lifecycle
KEY TAKEAWAY
- Diverse trial participation requires sustained community engagement, respectful communication, and transparent result sharing to ensure equity, trust, and scientific validity.
Diverse representation in clinical trials is vital for equitable healthcare and scientifically valid outcomes. Yet many trials still frequently underrepresent the populations most impacted by disease. Behtash Bahador (CISCRP) and Patrick Gee (iAdvocate) explored the barriers to the inclusion of diverse populations in research and shared strategies for lasting change.
Beyond race and ethnicity: addressing all predictors of healthcare access
Bahador outlined key regulatory milestones, including the FDA’s 1997 guidance to include women and minorities in clinical trials. While encouraging progress has been made in tackling racial and ethnic disparities in trial enrolment, Bahador stressed that other demographic factors—such as socioeconomic status—must also be addressed to truly achieve representative research.
Community first: speaking the language of love
Gee shared a compelling patient perspective, reflecting on how a lack of clear communication shaped his own healthcare journey. He underscored the importance of sustained community engagement and advocated for a more human-centred approach: “Speak in the language of love.” Gee suggested establishing relationships with both community leaders and members through consistent interactions, speaking with love and respect, and understanding the needs the community wants to address.
Initiatives such as use of mobile research education centres and sponsoring of community-led art contests illustrate how respectful engagement can break down barriers. While the global Perceptions and Insights study shows improvements in willingness to participate in trials, awareness remains limited. People most commonly encounter trial information through social media or online advertisements rather than via healthcare providers. Preferred trial formats still include local, in-person options—especially for African American participants—underscoring the need to tailor approaches.
You have to talk to the human being before you address the affliction.
The speakers called for researchers to communicate clinical trial results, involve patients on advisory boards, and invest in communities. As Gee poignantly observed: “You have to talk to the human being before you address the affliction.”
The sound of strategy: data-driven personalised communications
KEY TAKEAWAY
- Effective personalisation requires an understanding of HCPs behaviours, preferences, and expertise.
Personalised, data-driven communication can be impeded by factors such as data integration, compliance, or technical barriers. This plenary session explored how leveraging strategic insights into the learning behaviours and preferences of diverse audiences can help communicators to deliver content, which is both engaging, and relevant.
Leveraging strategic insights into the learning behaviours and preferences of diverse audiences can help communicators to deliver content, which is both engaging, and relevant.
Tailoring content for HCPs
Gary Lyons (Coronado Research) opened the session by explaining that healthcare professionals (HCPs) value personalised learning experiences. Describing the segmentation of HCPs based on their functional roles (eg, opinion leader or nurse) and behaviours (eg, ‘eager expert’ or ‘selective implementor’), Lyons reasoned that both the content and delivery of communication should be tailored to the preferences of these segments.
Expanding on this, Shweta Rane (Bridge Bio Pharma) explored how an audience’s level of expertise can be a key consideration in providing context-driven communication. Whilst an opinion leader may prefer to focus on a study’s key outcomes and objectives, an advanced individual may have more interest in survival data. Similarly, using tailored language that is specific to the individual’s knowledge, such as hyper-personalised communication for experts, and generic or plain language for beginners, is an important strategy for creating personalised content.
AI’s role in personalisation
A live poll showed that whilst the audience considered AI a potentially useful tool for personalisation, many were underconfident about how to achieve this. Lyons described effective prompts as those which convey the tone, language, focus, and level of granularity needed for AI to create content, which is tailored to a HCPs segment. Though he believes we can achieve “very good content using an AI model”, Lyons cautioned that human refinement of AI output is still necessary.
A crescendo in health equity: transparent post-trial publications in tune with evolving expectations
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- Post-trial publications should reflect the people behind the data, not just the data itself.
In this parallel session, moderated by Michelle Ouellette (Syneos Health), Jade Tuttle (Syneos Health), Charlotte Singh (Sanofi), and Shailesh Desai (Takeda) brought attention to a growing imperative: ethical and inclusive post-trial engagement, not only to close the loop with participants, but also to build lasting trust with historically underserved communities.
The session explored how medical publication professionals must evolve their practices in line with shifting regulatory expectations. New guidance from agencies such as the FDA and MHRA is making it clear that diversity, inclusion, and transparency are no longer optional in post-trial engagement.
To meet this challenge, publication teams must embed principles of equity early in the clinical development process, and move beyond check-box dissemination towards content that truly reflects patients’ lived experiences. Key strategies discussed included:
- Framing demographic data with context, rather than assumptions, for example avoiding using race as a biological proxy.
- Using inclusive, specific language to reflect multidimensional identities.
- Translating data into narratives that resonate with diverse communities.
A compelling case study demonstrated how trust was built with Aboriginal organisations through timely, transparent updates and community-led review of publications – an approach that prioritised respect, accuracy, and relevance over tokenism.
Ultimately, patients want to know that their participation in clinical trials matters.
Ultimately, patients want to know that their participation in clinical trials matters. Whether through personalised summaries, guidance on next steps, or a simple thank you, post-trial communications should acknowledge contributions and support participants in decision-making processes beyond the study. The session closed with the following call to action for medical publication professionals: ensure your work doesn’t just serve regulators, but also the communities who make research possible.
Measuring the impact of scientific communications in launch excellence: using medical affairs analytics and real world examples to identify best practice (sponsored session by IQVIA)
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- The successful introduction of a new product hinges on making strategic, data-driven noise where it matters most.
Rebecca Galbraith (IQVIA) and Joseph B. Laudano (IQVIA) led a sponsored parallel session on how Medical Affairs analytics can sharpen product communication strategies and steer successful launches via data-driven planning.
The evolution of technology means that today’s analytics can do more than just identify communications channels; they can identify channels relevant for a particular topic and audience. Modern tools can help distinguish which congresses and journals offer the best platform for specific data, track audience engagement across therapeutic areas, and even predict the impact of communications strategies through AI and machine learning.
Modern tools can help distinguish which congresses and journals offer the best platform for specific data, track audience engagement across therapeutic areas, and even predict the impact of communications strategies through AI and machine learning.
The speakers shared real-world examples and case studies from launches that achieved ‘Launch Excellence’. Common critical factors for success were clear, evidence-based narratives, targeted dissemination, and strategic collaboration with key medical experts. In addition, the session highlighted the importance of owning scientific themes within a therapeutic area, by not only developing a strong scientific narrative, but also crucially, choosing the right arenas and collaborators to amplify that message. As one speaker put it, “It’s not only noise that matters, but making noise in the right place.”
Medical Affairs teams were encouraged to go beyond traditional dissemination success metrics, for example paper acceptance rates or presentation attendance, and embrace more dynamic tools such as Share of Scientific Voice (SoSV), opinion leader ranking, and clinical adoption analysis.
For Medical Affairs professionals, the message was clear: strategic, analytics-informed communication is essential for maximising engagement and transforming data into impact.
A toolkit for harmonising publication extenders
KEY TAKEAWAY
- ISMPP’s new toolkit provides clear guidance to standardise the development of publication extenders, enhancing their reach and impact.
As the field of medical communications evolves, the demand for impactful and accessible content grows. In the parallel session led by Ann Overton (Fingerpaint Medical), Hamish McDougall (Sage Publishing), and Lana Vegman (Regeneron), attendees were introduced to a new toolkit from the ISMPP Digital and Visual Committee, designed to harmonise the development and use of publication extenders.
Publication extenders—such as infographics, graphical abstracts, PLS, and video abstracts—are becoming increasingly important for broadening reach and improving accessibility.
Publication extenders—such as infographics, graphical abstracts, PLS, and video abstracts—are becoming increasingly important for broadening reach and improving accessibility. At one publisher, manuscripts featuring extenders rose from just 8 in 2017 to 47 in January 2022. Despite this growth, widespread adoption remains limited by journal restrictions, lack of author awareness, and resources constraints.
The ISMPP toolkit seeks to address these challenges by providing clear guidance on standard definitions, best practices, and development workflows. It encourages early planning of extenders, active author involvement, and the submission of extenders alongside manuscripts for peer review. As Vegman noted, “Change requires a suggested pathway and then adoption of the suggested pathway.”
Part 1 of the toolkit, focusing on the most commonly used extender types, will soon be available through ISMPP eLearn, marking a significant step towards more consistent and engaging scientific communications.
Guided Poster Tour
Attendees also had the opportunity to attend guided poster tours of the following posters:
- Identifying processes and challenges in medical publication planning and execution for small biopharmaceutical companies – Lauren Carroll, Claudia Piano, Sara Duggan, Melanie Sweetlove, Vishal Gor, Donna Kelley, Leonie Pinkham
- Survey results: How high employee turnover in medical communications affects work quality and client satisfaction – Krista Terry, Elizabeth James
PRO tips: development and use of patient-reported outcome measures and publication best practices
KEY TAKEAWAY
- Integrate PROMs thoughtfully and early in study designs to ensure meaningful, patient-focused data collection.
Recognising the central role of patient experience in medical product development, this parallel session featured Mary Kate Ladd (Evidera), Carrie Lancos (AstraZeneca), and Erin Tomaszewski (AbbVie), who shared practical strategies for integrating patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) into clinical and real-world studies.
What are PROMs and why do they matter?
PROMs capture data directly from patients without clinician interpretation, providing valuable insight into how treatments affect patients’ daily lives. Developing these measures is a rigorous, iterative process involving patient input, expert guidance, and psychometric validation to ensure the tools are reliable, responsive, and capable of capturing meaningful outcomes.
How should PROMs be selected and integrated?
The FDA’s patient-focused drug development guidance highlights 4 key steps:
- Characterise patient experience and unmet needs.
- Select or develop PROMs that assess outcomes meaningful to patients.
- Define clear, quantifiable endpoints to evaluate change.
- Consider the audience when presenting PROM data to ensure clarity and relevance.
Publishing PROM data: key considerations
PROM data differ from clinical trial data, often presenting higher rates of missing values and limited options for imputation. Authors should clearly explain PROM concepts and scoring systems, address copyright and licensing considerations, and ensure data are accessible and understandable to all stakeholders, including patients.
Authors should clearly explain PROM concepts and scoring systems, address copyright and licensing considerations, and ensure data are accessible and understandable to all stakeholders, including patients.
PRO tips
As the session concluded, the speakers shared 4 tips for effective PROM implementation and publication:
- Familiarise yourself with key PROMs in your therapeutic area.
- Collaborate early with PROM colleagues.
- Use clear, consistent language to explain PROM concepts.
- Confirm all copyright and licensing requirements before use or publication.
A pubs rhapsody: is this real pubs life? Is this inequity? Our global landscape, must address our reality
KEY TAKEAWAY
- AI can help level the global playing field in medical publications—but only if used thoughtfully, with cultural awareness, robust training, and a commitment to true equity.
Language and legacy
The current medical publications landscape privileges English-speaking authors and Western cultural norms, creating structural barriers for non-native English speakers and under-represented regions. Jonathan Lee (Takeda), Blair Hesp (Kainic Medical Communications), Julie Yaun (Wiley), Yaming Wang (Alphabet Health) and Anne Wong (Roche) described how this ultimately leads to loss of insights from experts in particular regions and presents a barrier to understanding regional clinical practice and patient experiences.
Everyday inequities faced by experts include out of hours calls due to time zone differences, translation fatigue, and journals rejecting country-specific (non-Western) datasets. However inequity goes far beyond this, global health journals are mainly located in high-income English-speaking counties, journal editorial boards lack diversity and pharmaceutical companies prioritise selected countries and regions in their strategy.
The AI opportunity
AI could be a potential equaliser. Tools that assist with translation, editing, peer review, and journal submissions could allow broader participation in global discourse. But concerns remain—AI risks reinforcing bias, misinterpreting cultural nuance, or producing content flagged as AI-generated.
Tools that assist with translation, editing, peer review, and journal submissions could allow broader participation in global discourse.
How can inequity be addressed by publication professionals?
Speakers urged the community to redefine their current understanding of diversity, equity, and inclusion within the context of language and culture by:
- including regional journals and conferences in publication plans
- training in AI tools that support global authorship
- recognising AI’s limitations and partnering to improve tools
- shifting language norms to embrace non-Western voices.
In summary, medical publications are skewed towards the predominant Western culture — we must be more inclusive to ensure that patient needs are met. Tools that facilitate input from global experts could help address disparities.
Exploring the CMPPTM credential: an expert-led interactive session
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- CMPP™ supports professional growth while providing global recognition and a growing community.
- A new platform makes recertification maintenance more accessible.
CMPP™ evolution and value
In a panel discussion hosted by the ISMPP Certification Board, Dana Fox (IPG), Faith DiBiasi (AstraZeneca), Claudia Piano (ApotheCom), and Danita Sutton (ISMPP) explored the development, value, and practicalities of obtaining and maintaining the Certified Medical Publication Professional (CMPP™) credential. Since the first certification in 2009, the CMPP™ programme has grown significantly, with 1,885 professionals certified across 30 countries and 6 continents.
The panellists emphasised the CMPP™ credential’s impact on career development, describing it as a mark of credibility and a catalyst for confidence. This is reflected in the growing global uptake. “When you pass the test, it’s a great confidence builder,” one speaker noted.
CMPP™ certification and recertification
To pursue certification, candidates must apply for and sit a comprehensive exam. The exam spans 3 hours, includes 150 questions across 3 domains, and is available either in-person at Pearson VUE centres or online via OnVUE. To aid preparation, ISMPP provides a candidate handbook and access to volunteer mentors, helping to ensure candidates feel supported throughout their journey.
All supporting resources – including guidance documents, exam details, and mentoring options – are readily available on the ISMPP website, ensuring transparency and accessibility for prospective and current CMPP™ holders.
Crucially, the panel discussed recent improvements to the 5-year recertification process. Professionals can maintain their CMPP™ status by retaking the exam or through continuing education. Maintenance of the credential through continuing education is now more user-friendly thanks to the introduction of LearningBUILDER™, a new certification management platform launched in January 2025.
Aspiring professionals are encouraged to explore the CMPP™ pathway, not only as a mark of expertise but also as a strategic step in long-term career advancement.
Aspiring professionals are encouraged to explore the CMPP™ pathway, not only as a mark of expertise but also as a strategic step in long-term career advancement.
Member research oral presentations
Publishing plain language summaries (PLS): successes and challenges
KEY TAKEAWAY
- Education, clearer guidelines, and publisher support are essential to improve the discoverability and availability of PLS.
Nelma Pertega Gomes (IPSEN) explored current challenges and successes in the implementation of PLS from both author and publisher perspectives.
The author perspective
Of 72 manuscripts published by 1 company (July 2022 to October 2024), 56 included a PLS. Journals not accepting or removing PLS without notice were common barriers. Pertega Gomes encouraged authors to pursue training, select journals that support PLS, and communicate with publishers.
The publisher perspective
Over 3 years, 1 publisher issued 1,053 PLS, advocating for a 250-word text format. The biggest barrier is a lack of understanding among authors and editors about PLS.
PLS discoverability relies on publishers tagging them in PubMed metadata, but many remain behind paywalls, especially in top-tier journals. Although first authors may share PLS through direct contact, most people are unaware of this option. Uniform policies and increased education across journals, publishers and stakeholders are urgently needed.
Uniform policies and increased education across journals, publishers and stakeholders are urgently needed.
Equity in access to information on newly approved drugs: how readily available are plain language summaries?
KEY TAKEAWAY
- Improving the discoverability and access to PLS, particularly in top-tier journals, is critical to advancing health equity.
Kaitlin Stanton (Nucleus Global) examined how the availability of PLS for clinical trial publications affects health equity.
Using a dataset of 192 FDA-approved drugs from 2021 to 2024, the study found 219 associated pivotal trial manuscripts; 13 PLS were linked to these manuscripts, with just 10 available via open access. Additionally, 31 manuscripts had corresponding PLS of publications (PLSPs), primarily for drugs approved in 2022 and 2023. PLS availability declined after drug approval, and journals that published PLS were most commonly lower-tier journals.
The persistent use of highly technical language is a significant barrier to equitable access to health information.
Stanton emphasised that the persistent use of highly technical language is a significant barrier to equitable access to health information, stating “the primary focus [of drug companies] appears to be getting clinical data to a clinical audience.” She called for a collective commitment—especially from top-tier journals and industry sponsors—to ensure that trial results are discoverable and accessible to the wider public.
Harmonising the future: generative AI’s effects on medical communications and cross-industry collaborations
KEY TAKEAWAY
- AI can boost speed and scale in publication development but requires collaboration between pharmaceutical companies and agencies to prioritise quality and embrace new working models.
A new tempo for MedComms
The panel comprised a mix of pharmaceutical and agency leaders: Jason Gardner (Real Chemistry), Jennifer Ghith (GSK), Kristyn Morgan (Envision), and Catherine Skobe (Pfizer). In their experience, bold adaptation is needed as generative AI reshapes the medical communications landscape.
AI offers speed, scale, and smart insights, but success hinges on collaborative strategy, ethical guardrails, and robust quality standards.
Proof in practice
Pfizer has already seen AI-assisted tools reduce first-draft times by 40% and, in some cases, overall manuscript timelines by 15%.
Skobe described how Pfizer has already seen AI-assisted tools reduce first-draft times by 40% and, in some cases, overall manuscript timelines by 15%. Applications of AI range from literature searches and summarisation to insight generation and sentiment analysis. Yet, AI uptake remains patchy—only 20% of manuscripts currently use generative tools despite only 7% of authors refusing AI use outright (due to journal or personal concerns).
Tips for AI success
From innovation labs to feedback loops, the panel offered a practical roadmap:
- Embed collaboration into contracts and training.
- Use shared AI tools when appropriate.
- Design collaborative innovation labs.
- Establish transparent best practices for implementation (most impactful).
- Maintain feedback loops (most feasible).
A steep learning curve
Use of AI can achieve high quality publications that meet ICMJE recommendations. In future, trust, clarity of use, and communication will be essential to maintain quality and preserve longstanding relationships between agencies and pharmaceutical companies. Visit the ISMPP AI resources to keep up to date with industry guidance regarding AI use.
Behind the music: a candid conversation with journal editors and publishers
KEY TAKEAWAY
- Fraudulent submissions are on the rise, PLS lack consistency, and innovation is essential but not equally accessible for all journals.
In a candid discussion moderated by Kate Travis (Retraction Watch), Sam Cavana (Taylor & Francis), Lauren Coligan (PLOS), and Dan Kulp (American Urological Association) lifted the lid on the biggest challenges shaking up medical publishing today. From papermills to the promise (and pitfalls) of PLS.
PLS: good intentions, unclear execution
PLS were created to make science more accessible—but in practice, they’re often overlooked. Authors tend to treat them as an afterthought, and few journals enforce consistent standards. The panel called for:
- Better visibility: PLS should be easy to find and clearly linked to the original article.
- Standardisation: clearer guidelines across journals would improve quality.
- Appropriate review: but by whom—editors, scientists, or patients?
Retractions aren’t always scandalous
One in 500 papers now gets retracted (up from 1 in 5,000), with data manipulation now more readily detectible. Audience polling busted the myth that all retractions signal misconduct. Retractions may stem from honest errors—not just fraud.
Fraud on the rise
Papermills bribe editors, forge reviewer emails, and resubmit rejected work under different authors. Journals are fighting back—but at great cost. Some are rethinking author-suggested reviewers and flagging suspicious activity early. Moreover predatory journals are also on the rise: view the COPE member list designed to exclude them.
Innovation: uneven but essential
Innovation is vital to keep up with the rapidly changing landscape, but not all publishers are equally equipped to pursue it.
One thing is clear: innovation is vital to keep up with the rapidly changing landscape, but not all publishers are equally equipped to pursue it. Grant-funded journals such as PLOS are not influenced by investors and so play an important role in pushing boundaries. However, commercial journals often hold the keys to scalable innovation thanks to greater resources and investor backing.
Roundtable Sessions
Attendees had the opportunity to participate in roundtables, which covered the following topics:
- EDI as jazz fusion: blending diverse tones to transform medical communications
- Bridging the gaps between global and regional teams for optimal content delivery
- Diversity reporting in publications: composing a clear path for authors through updated guidance
- Symphony of submissions: demystifying video and podcast articles
- The people’s PubMed: empowering patients in the age of misinformation
- Tuning out predatory publishers: how to identify and avoid insidious publication practices
- Conducting the publication planning process with a multidisciplinary team: how to ensure the team is playing the same tune
- Shaping the future of publication metrics
- Social media hits: amplifying your medical publications to reach chart-topping success
- A debut concert of ‘accelerando publications’, by the innovation symphony orchestra (member proposal)
- Empathy as innovation: composing empathetic scientific writing with diverse patient perspectives
- Efficiency: rethinking RFIs for smarter decision-making (ISMPP ORION RFP Task Force)
- A crescendo in health equity: transparent post-trial publications in tune with evolving expectations
- Using medical affairs analytics to hit the high notes in scientific communications
- Translating the score: best practices for incorporating plain language summaries into integrated publication plans
- AI language editing for non-native English speakers – is it the same as generative AI?
- The secrets to working effectively with small pharma and biotech
- Never miss a beat: strategies to address data gaps in pharmaceutical research using patient perspectives
- Hot topics in medical publications
Poster and ISMPP Professional Excellence Awards
The awards presentation began with the announcement of this year’s poster prize winners, celebrating innovation, clarity and forward thinking in medical publications:
- Most reflective of meeting theme: Breaking into medical writing: professional advice for new medical writers – John Vrbensky, Emilie Croisier, Brittany Eldridge, Alyson Rice, Patty Phipps, Sharon Dirksen, Pauline Ng, and Reem Berro.
- Best original research: The battle of voices: AI-generated versus human-narrated podcasts in publications – Rindcy Davis, Peter Benko, Joseph Gallo, Katelyn Frisone, and Pauline Ng.
- Best visual and accessible design: Speaking their language: Healthcare professionals’ use of plain language materials with patients – Hamish McDougall, Isabel Katz, Alexa Holland, and Sarah J. Clements.
- Future forward: Shaping patient involvement in publications: identifying and overcoming barriers through expert insights – Shweta Rane, Dawn Lobban, Trishna Bharadia, and Bradley Meehan.
Following the poster prizes, attention turned to the ISMPP Professional Excellence Awards, where the Society celebrated the exceptional contributions of its members. Awards were presented in the following categories:
- Outstanding Committee Member Award: Tim Stentiford
- CMPP Award: Haruko Isomura
- Rising Star Award: John Vrbensky
- President’s Award: Steve Palmisano and Todd Parker
- Lifetime Achievement Award: Gordon Muir-Jones
Many congratulations to all of this year’s winners!
Why not also read our summaries of Day 1 and Day 3 of the meeting?
——————————————————–
Written as part of a Media Partnership between ISMPP and The Publication Plan, by Aspire Scientific, an independent medical writing agency led by experienced editorial team members, and supported by MSc and/or PhD-educated writers.
——————————————————–
Categories