I am a big advocate of evolving interests outside of a narrowly defined "lane". Today's daily post by marketing fascinator Seth Godin titled, You Don't Know Lefsetz?, serves as a timely case in point. I encourage you to explore the industry and cultural leaders cited in his blog--I hope that you become familiar with more than a few.
The problem with the medical content field evolves from Kalnienk vision or what is more commonly described as tunnel vision. Information is siloed or placed in verticals with little regard for points of connection. In the field of health economics and outcomes research (HEOR) I see this happening from within the US market and between US and European HEOR professionals. Thomas Piketty, a french economist specifically discussed different philosophies that had him flee the US to return to France. He pointed out that US HEOR tends to seek primarily models and mathematical confirmation while social context and theories are consulted more often outside of US markets.
I have met territorial HEOR professionals more focused on an ill-suited PhD credential in an obscure research lab then relevance to integrating sound economic principles into daily practice. HEOR in the US has evolved within the pharmaceutical industry as a way to evaluate the global value of emerging drugs or interventions and confirm market access in the ever extended drug life-cycle beyond R&D.
As a writer I find principles of HEOR documents more compelling than implementation or utility to drive market access or reimbursement in the pharmaceutical marketplace. Value dossiers provide inventory of clinical, economic, and humanistic information for any drug, device, or intervention across a variety of therapeutic areas. Additionally burden of illness and epidemiology are included as supporting evidence and create convincing arguments for value messaging and market access.
Stakeholders in healthcare, especially medical education where I have spent over a decade writing for pharma, agencies, and academia aren't often concerned with decision models for health economic evaluation. So what you might ask? The problem is an inability to contribute meaningful discourse relevant to the rich information that should be influencing content development and alignment of true practice gaps in modern medicine.
How can you meet provider challenges at the point of care, beyond episodic solutions, without awareness of economies and clinical downstream outcomes? Value-reimbursement is aligned with the full arc of care in managing patients with chronic conditions. How are we meeting this need?
The poster represented below is an imperfect but sincere evaluation of the skill level of writers currently working in the HEOR discipline. Executives that rely on diverse integration of economic considerations, medical content, and a compelling narrative have identified a discernible gap in quality and access to writers.
It's time to step out of verticals, silos, or whatever the "industry speak" is and integrate across disciplines in search of strong business practices relevant for marketing, memetics, clinical knowledge, and statistical rigor.
We are using data to inform but is bigger really better? The quality of data is only as good as the questions we are asking and the outcomes we are measuring. Gathering data doesn't make you great at what you do. How does it inform your industry awareness and medical content and education strategies?
freelance medical content, media, health economics, health policy , and insight analytics