The 2025 ISMPP Academy takes place on November 13-14 in Boston.

REGISTER TODAY!
Registration is open until October 30, 2025

ISMPP’s 2-day interactive educational academy provides real-world solutions and focuses on implementation across four critical areas: Future of Work (AI), Compliance and Clarity, Operational Success, and Communication Impact. View the full agenda online!

Topics covered include:

• Publication planning
• Visual communications
• GPP and publication policies/SOPs
• Plain language summaries
• Real-world evidence
• Practical AI

 Academy features:

• 6 unique active learning sessions – for both newer professionals and experienced professionals
• Evaluate case studies
• Group problem-solving
• Certification: earn up to 10 CMPP credits
• Networking: two days of face-to-face professional connection
• Solutions: visit the Tabletop Exhibit Gallery showcasing medical communications and technology providers

PLUS Technology Demos, Exhibitors, Networking, and More!

VIEW the meeting agenda. REGISTER BY OCTOBER 30!
Learn about ISMPP at: www.ismpp.org

————————————————–

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Structured publication planning is no longer optional in MedTech—it’s a regulatory, clinical, and commercial imperative.
• Pharma-derived models need to be adapted to suit the realities of device, diagnostic, and software-based innovations.
• ISMPP offers cost-effective, flexible tools to upskill teams and foster peer learning—especially where internal capacity is limited.
•  Companies that commit to educating their staff on the foundations of publication planning can gain visibility, credibility, and strategic advantage.
• Partnering with publication professionals and/or agencies allows companies to implement strong publication practices now, while building internal knowledge and capacity for the future.

Introduction: MedTech at a crossroads

The medical technology (MedTech) sector is evolving rapidly, the result of both design innovations and increasing regulatory requirements. These dual trends have transformed nearly all areas of the industry, which spans surgical devices, diagnostics, digital health platforms, and increasingly, software and artificial intelligence (AI)-powered tools.

Yet there’s one area where MedTech appears to remain more static: publication practices. This isn’t due to any inherent limitations within the industry, but rather because most MedTech companies—especially small to mid-sized ones—simply lack the internal infrastructure to support strategic, consistent publication planning and execution.

As outlined in a previous article focused on small pharma and biotech companies, the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) plays an essential role in equipping publication professionals with the tools and community they need to stay ahead. That same opportunity—and urgency—now applies to MedTech.

“There is growing recognition that MedTech products bring enormous value to healthcare, and with that has come increasing scrutiny. To keep pace, companies must apply the same innovative spirit to publication practices as they do to product development. Those that invest in building publication planning knowledge and resources now can set the standard for the field going forward.”
– John Watson, The Manuscript Agent

The publication planning gap in MedTech

Unlike the pharmaceutical sector, many MedTech companies don’t have dedicated publication teams. Instead, evidence dissemination responsibilities often fall to medical affairs or regulatory staff juggling multiple roles. Although at odds with good publication practice, and because of the unique MedTech environment, commercial roles are sometimes involved as well. As a result, publication efforts may be reactive—tied solely to product launches or regulatory milestones—and lack long-term strategic vision. When publication plans exist, they are often developed without input from all relevant stakeholders, potentially resulting in redundancies or even conflicting messages.

Adding to the complexity, traditional pharma-derived publication models don’t map neatly onto MedTech lifecycles. MedTech products tend to iterate faster, making it harder to generate long-term evidence. Whereas pharma hinges on large randomized controlled trials, MedTech evidence generation more often depends on an array of smaller studies, retrospective analyses, registries, and other pragmatic data sources that balance scientific rigor with cost constraints. These differences can be especially challenging for smaller companies with limited bandwidth for structured publication planning.

A survey conducted by the ISMPP Small Companies Education Committee found that professionals in small and device-focused companies cite lack of time, training, and structured guidance as top barriers to publication planning. (1)

Regulatory and market pressures are rising

Regulatory requirements facing the industry have intensified, particularly with the implementation of the European Medical Devices Regulation (EU MDR). Where companies were once able to rely on data with comparable devices, they now must provide robust clinical evidence with their own technologies. This shift has also increased scrutiny of post-market surveillance, safety reporting, and health economic data from regulators, payers, and clinicians.

Meanwhile, the MedTech industry is innovating at an accelerated pace. The number of FDA-cleared AI and machine learning-enabled devices surpassed 1,000 in 2024, with software-based tools leading the charge. These novel products raise complex new questions around algorithm transparency and evidence generation, placing further emphasis on the need for timely, well-structured publications.

In short, MedTech companies face an unprecedented imperative to generate and communicate high-quality data on their products. Just as they have innovated with their products, so too must they adopt strategies for successful evidence dissemination.

Whether launching a Class III implant or a Class I digital tool, companies must demonstrate credibility—and transparent, peer-reviewed publications remain the most effective way to do so. By strengthening their foundational knowledge around publication planning now, MedTech teams can do more than keep pace with change—they can lead it.

What MedTech can gain from stronger publication planning

Publication planning is not just about compliance; it’s a strategic investment in building credibility, commercial success, and trust. With even modest investments, MedTech companies can:

• ensure clinical evidence is disseminated through credible, peer-reviewed channels
• boost HCP confidence and product adoption
• build long-term visibility for products and platforms
• support regulatory and reimbursement submissions.

Better publication planning strengthens the story around a product and helps ensure that story is heard.

Building skills and capacity: how ISMPP can help

ISMPP offers education and training especially relevant to those navigating the complexity of MedTech communications. For companies without formal training programmes or clear internal publication processes, ISMPP serves as a practical partner and knowledge hub.

Members benefit from:

• training on Good Publications Practice (GPP 2022)
• guidance on authorship, transparency, and AI use in writing
• access to ISMPP U webinars, podcasts, and the CMPP certification
• peer connection via ISMPP Connect, which includes professionals working in diagnostics, devices, and software settings.

ISMPP’s Certified Medical Publication Professional (CMPP) credential is recognized globally and is increasingly valued by employers and partners in the MedTech sector.

Partnering with experts: agency support for publications

MedTech companies aren’t on this journey alone: many choose to partner with medical communications agencies who bring expertise, familiarity with compliant publication processes, and therapeutic area knowledge—without requiring additional internal hires.

This hybrid model works especially well when:

• teams are stretched thin
• publication needs must scale quickly
• expertise in regulatory-driven publication formats is lacking.

Strategic partnerships allow even smaller companies to produce high-quality, compliant publications that support key business objectives.

This article was developed on behalf of the ISMPP Small Companies Outreach Committee by John Watson (The Manuscript Agent), Tony Ferrar (Porterhouse Medical), and Anne-Clare Wadsworth (Amica Scientific). Please note, the authors used ChatGPT-4o (OpenAI) to support the collation of resources and to generate an initial outline and draft of the manuscript. The authors reviewed, edited, and take full responsibility for all subsequent content and the final submitted version.

References

(1) Carroll L, Duggan S, Sweetlove M, Gor V, Kelley D, Pinkham L, Piano CA. Identifying processes and challenges in medical publication planning and execution for small biopharmaceutical companies. Presented at: International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) Annual Meeting; 12–14 May 2025; Washington, DC

————————————————

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Publication extenders make articles more accessible, increase citations, and aid reader comprehension.
• Lack of adoption by publishers or and difficulty finding publication extenders on journal platforms highlights opportunities for improvements.

Publication extenders, such as plain-language summaries (PLSs), infographics, and video abstracts, have become incredibly useful tools for reaching a wider audience, enhancing the impact of research. Yet evidence supporting their use has not been readily available. To address this, the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) Digital/Visual Communications Committee developed the Publication Extenders Evidence Resource. In an article published in The MAP Newsletter, Kelly Soldavin and colleagues discuss key findings, demonstrating the value of publication extenders.

Publication extenders improve article metrics

Publication extenders can lead to increased downloads, Altmetric scores, and citations. The authors point to studies that found:

• Articles with video abstracts had a 1.206 higher citation rate than those without.
• 62% of articles with a text-based PLS were downloaded significantly more than similar articles without PLSs.

Audience preferences for publication extenders vary

The authors highlight several studies assessing the format of publication extenders preferred by different groups. Patients report that publication extenders, and specifically PLSs with plain text and infographics, make articles easier to understand. On the other hand, some health care professionals prefer plain-text PLSs over graphical formats.

Uptake of publication extenders could be improved

“While the benefits of publication extenders are clear, uptake by authors and journals is low.”

While the benefits of publication extenders are clear, uptake by authors and journals is generally low: one study found only 11 of 30 haematology journals allowed PLSs. Even when publication extenders are used, they are often difficult to find on journal platforms.

Looking to the future

The authors conclude that research consistently shows publication extenders enhance the impact of research, making it more accessible across a wide audience. Publishers should consider ways to make publication extenders more discoverable, while authors and publication planning professionals should consider platforms other than those offered by journals to improve the accessibility of digital content.

—————————————————

The 21^st 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 CMPP^TM 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.

——————————————————–

The 21^st 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 first 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 2 here; and our Day 3 summary here.

Summaries of Day 1

Presidential address

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Medical publication professionals should embrace diversity of thought and lead with compassion, clarity, and patient-centred values.
• ISMPP members are encouraged to take an active role in shaping the future of the profession.

Diversity of thought is essential for overcoming blind spots and advancing meaningful science.

Jennifer Ghith (GSK) opened the 21^st Annual Meeting of ISMPP, framing medical publications as a mission rather than just a profession—a mission rooted in compassion and scientific integrity. She urged medical publication professionals to champion values such as clarity and inclusivity, noting that diversity of thought was essential for overcoming blind spots and advancing meaningful science. Her remarks set the tone for the meeting’s theme: “Diversity and Innovation: In Concert.”

ISMPP President Rob Matheis acknowledged the variety of challenges faced by publication professionals but urged members to take pride in the profession’s increasing relevance, celebrating the shift towards patient-centred communication and highlighting the need to focus not just on clinical metrics but on the impact treatments have on people’s daily lives. Using the standard deviation equation as a metaphor, Matheis reminded the audience that variability is intrinsic to science—and that the same holds true for innovation in publications.

Matheis reported that ISMPP remains in excellent health, with a balanced budget, strong membership, and an expanding portfolio of initiatives to further progress the society. Key developments include the introduction of a patient membership programme and enhanced tools for members, such as the ISMPP Expert Directory, ISMPP Learning Hub, and resources on digital publication extenders. He also showcased ways for members to get involved through society committees and collaborative projects.

Matheis concluded with a call for members—new and established alike—to participate actively in ISMPP’s work, reinforcing the strength and unity of the medical publications community.

Keynote – Why does it take 5 to tango in health care? – Dr. Verena Voelter

KEY TAKEAWAY

• The conventional siloed approach to healthcare is duplicative and inefficient and stakeholders need to work together to create value in healthcare. Medical publications professionals can help create these networks.

Breaking down complexity in healthcare delivery

Dr. Verena Voelter, internist and oncologist, and author of It Takes 5 to Tango and The Next Tango: a Patient Guide, discussed how cooperation in healthcare can lead to greater efficiency and improved patient outcomes. Voelter started by describing how silos exist within the increasingly complex world of healthcare delivery. She provided examples of how problems and issues arise when healthcare delivery is viewed from the perspective of only one of the five ‘P’s: patients, providers, pharma, payers, and policy makers. By having a greater understanding of the needs and perspectives of other participants in healthcare delivery, these problems can often be addressed in collaborative ways that are simple and efficient.

The importance of conversations

The first step in fostering this collaborative approach is to start conversations that relate to the needs of the different participants and focused on patient outcomes. Dr Voelter gave an example of where a skincare company was struggling to gain payer approval for the use of their product. They developed a tool that enabled healthcare professionals to send pictures to the payers, shortening time to payer approval.

Dr Voelter also explored the extent to which medical publication professionals can play a role in this process. The majority response from an audience survey was ‘a lot’. Dr Voelter suggested that stakeholder mapping followed by greater engagement with others would help identify unmet needs. An important part of this is asking questions and listening.

Artificial Intelligence and redefining VUCA

On the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare, Voelter though that while AI can be a useful tool in healthcare, the questions that are asked must be the right ones, and that comes from having a good understanding of the unmet needs. Regarding the role of collaboration in generating new ideas, Dr Voelter urged us to include more perspectives: ‘Innovation happens at the intersection.’

“Include more perspectives: Innovation happens at the intersection.”

Although healthcare is a complex environment, often characterised by the acronym VUCA: volatility, uncertainty, chaos, and ambiguity, Dr Voelter urged us to become the 6^th ‘P’ in the equation. By harnessing the power of our networks, we can help to bring value, address unmet needs, collaborate and be proactive.

Member research oral presentations

Driving real-time equity analysis to enhance the impact of medical publishing

KEY TAKEAWAY

• Achieving equity in medical publishing requires proactive and structured consideration at every stage of the publication process.

In the first presentation of the Member Research session, Laura Watts (Lumanity) introduced a practical framework aimed at addressing disparities in healthcare access from a publishing perspective.

Building on the Cochrane Group’s PROGRESS-Plus framework; a list of characteristics thought to stratify health opportunities and outcomes, and the results of a literature search,  Watts and colleagues developed 40 questions designed to prompt inclusive thinking at each stage of the publication process. Examples include:

• How are the study outcomes determined?
• How is it decided which post hoc analyses to support?
• What criteria are used for nominating peer reviewers?

The study concluded that rethinking medical communications through a practical framework ensures scientific rigour and diverse representation, advancing equity and innovation in global health. Contribution to the further development of this framework was encouraged, with Watts emphasising the attendee’s role in pursuing equity in medical publishing.

Everyone in this room is positioned to change [global disparities in access to healthcare information].

Empathy as innovation: assessing the perception of empathy in scientific writing

KEY TAKEAWAY

• Empathy is associated with improved patient satisfaction and compliance, but no standard metric for assessing empathy in scientific writing exists.

The second talk of the session presented by Naseem Ahmed (Inizio) and Leah Bernstein (Inizio) explored how different characteristics of sample abstracts impacted the perception of empathy amongst seven patients/patient advocates/caregivers, and twenty-two medical writers.

Although both groups rated empathy in scientific writing as somewhat to extremely important, opinions on how this was characterised differed. Patients selected comprehensibility and readability as the most important factors in conveying empathy, while medical writers prioritised empathetic descriptions of disease impact and use of patient-first language.

Further analysis revealed that empathy ratings were highly correlated with tone and patient-first language scores amongst patients and medical writers, respectively. Across all participants, the SMOG index (Simple Measure of Gobbledygook) scoring system showed the strongest overall correlation with empathy ratings, suggesting it may serve as a useful starting point in the development of a metric for assessing empathy.

The SMOG (Simple Measure of Gobbledygook) index may be a useful starting point to assess empathy.

Bridging the gap: a roadmap to patient partnerships through practical tools, inclusive language, and impact measurement

KEY TAKEAWAY

• Meaningful and measurable patient involvement starts with early, transparent engagement, supported by practical tools and inclusive language.

The persistent challenges of effective patient engagement in medical publications took centre stage during a dynamic panel session moderated by Catherine Skobe (Pfizer). Joined by speakers Mohammed Najeeb Ashraf (SciVoc Consulting Inc.), Simon Stones (Amica Scientific), and Jennifer Regala (Wolters Kluwer Health), the panel shared actionable solutions informed by recent ISMPP initiatives and insights from member surveys.

Key barriers to patient engagement

The discussion began by exploring common barriers including limited time and resources, a lack of transparency around patient compensation, and language-related challenges. The panel stressed the need to involve patients early, foster open and ongoing dialogue, and accommodate diverse learning preferences to improve engagement outcomes.

Tools and resources to support engagement

ISMPP’s Patient Engagement webpage now hosts a range of practical tools, including a patient lexicon, engagement enablers (coming soon), and impact metrics. Looking ahead, the upcoming PLS Finder tool—a cross-publisher initiative—aims to streamline access to plain language summaries (PLS) via an intuitive search platform.

Inclusive language emerged as a critical foundation for building trust and promoting health literacy.

Inclusive language emerged as a critical foundation for building trust and promoting health literacy. The panel encouraged using person-first language, integrating multimedia resources such as videos and podcasts, and setting clear expectations at the outset of patient partnerships.

Measuring the impact of engagement

To assess the effectiveness of patient involvement, the panel recommended combining quantitative measures—like publication reach and social media engagement—with qualitative feedback through focus groups and interviews. Understanding patient motivations and ensuring comprehensive onboarding were highlighted as essential to achieving meaningful and lasting engagement.

New guiding principles on the horizon

The session closed with a preview of ISMPP’s upcoming patient partnership guiding principles. The principles will provide a best practice resource to publication professionals to support effective and respectful collaborations with patients and advocacy groups.

AI-generated content and copyright – are we synthesizing, sampling or stealing?

KEY TAKEAWAY

• Medical publication professionals must prioritise transparency, verify licensing before using generative AI tools, and stay informed as copyright laws evolve.

Gary Lyons (Coronado Research) led a timely discussion on the evolving intersection of AI and copyright in medical publishing. He was joined by panellists Catherine Zaller Rowland (Copyright Clearance Center), Tammy Ravas (University of Montana), and Chris Bendall (Research Solutions). Together, they explored the copyright implications of using generative AI (GenAI) tools and shared best practices for the responsible use of journal content.

The session opened with a review of copyright principles, including Creative Commons licenses, open access publications, and licensing frameworks. A key concern was ownership: while the use of copyrighted materials as inputs for AI tools can violate existing laws, AI-generated outputs currently cannot be copyrighted in the US—though this may change and the law varies across other countries.

Key ethical and legal considerations

• Authorship: GenAI tools cannot be credited as authors; human accountability remains essential.
• Transparency: Disclosing AI use in content creation is critical, and professionals should follow established guidelines, including those from the ICMJE and WAME.
• Terms of service: Users must carefully review platform terms to fully understand data usage and ownership rights.

Towards responsible AI use

It is both possible and essential to balance copyright protection with responsible AI adoption.

As the field of AI in publishing continues to develop, it is both possible and essential to balance copyright protection with responsible AI adoption. The panel recommended the following actions:

• Stay informed: Monitor developments in copyright law and advancements in AI technology.
• Establish clear policies: Develop comprehensive internal guidelines for AI usage and copyright compliance.
• Secure appropriate licensing: Ensure all materials are properly licensed through direct or collective agreements.

The session concluded with an overview of some practical tools designed to support responsible AI use in medical publishing, including:

• Author checklists for incorporating AI responsibly in research and manuscript preparation.
• New resources from the ISMPP AI task force, providing up-to-date guidance on AI-related publishing practices.

Tuning out bias in medical communications: amplifying diverse voices for innovation

KEY TAKEAWAY

• Mitigating bias is essential for maintaining equity and inclusivity in medical research, and requires collaborative approaches throughout the publication process.

Mitigation of bias should be central to medical publication strategies.

 Statistical bias: a case study

To begin this session, moderated by Susanne Ulm (Alphabet Health), Eric Teoh (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety) illustrated the impact of bias in data generation, analysis and interpretation by presenting data comparisons for vehicle crash rates amongst automated vehicles vs. human drivers. Superficially, crash rates for automated vehicles appear up to 4 times greater than those for human drivers. However, when accounting for statistical bias – such as mandatory reporting of minor incidents for automated vehicles – adjusted crash rates may be around 40% lower than those for human drivers.

AI perspectives

Walter Bender (Sorcero) explored the tendencies of large language models (LLMs) to introduce bias or misinformation. Data hallucinations and use of language which is overly promotional, conclusive, or biased – such as LLMs automatically referring to people with breast cancer as women – were just some of the examples discussed, with Bender advocating for both human and AI oversight in mitigating these issues.

LLMs are always certain, sometimes right.

Publishing and Medical Writing perspectives

Tim Mackey, Editor-in-chief of Infodemiology, a Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR) publication, and Susanne Elm (Alphabet Health), stressed the potential for introduction of bias at every stage of the research and publishing process. Speaking to his background in both the publishing and research industries, Mackey explored the responsibilities of authors, reviewers and editors as overseers of generative AI tools, guided by principles outlined in an editorial published in JMIR.

Recommended approaches to mitigating bias

The session concluded with a summary of recommendations to make bias mitigation central to publication strategies. Speakers emphasised the need for hybrid human–AI collaboration, inclusivity, and transparency, and called for a commitment to continuous learning and improvement.

The revised ISMPP Code of Ethics – a harmonization of ethical principles and advances in the field of medical publications

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• The ISMPP Code of Ethics sets out the shared global values for medical publication professionals.
• Updates to the code will provide much needed guidance regarding the use of AI, increased patient involvement in publications and the growing need for transparency.

The revised ISMPP Code of Ethics will address the evolving complexities of medical publishing while preserving the core values of integrity, transparency, legal compliance, and objectivity.

 A new era for publication ethics

Thomas Gegeny (Prime Global), Jennie Jacobson (Jacobson Medical Writing), Marcel Kuttab (AstraZeneca), Valerie Moss (Prime Global), and Kelly Soldavin (Taylor & Francis) described the rationale for updating the ISMPP Code of Ethics for the current era of medical publishing. Revisions to the code will address the evolving complexities of medical publishing—clarifying expectations around AI, the growing role of patient advocates and caregivers, and the need for transparency—while preserving its core values of integrity, transparency, legal compliance, and objectivity.

A new user-friendly format

An important change to the code is the new user-friendly format, with topic-based navigation, embedded hyperlinks, and an upcoming interactive eLearn module. The changes reflect input from AMWA, EMWA, journal publishers, and the ISMPP AI Task Force, ensuring broad relevance across regions and disciplines.

Real world dilemmas: the code in practice

The session spotlighted several case studies, with audience discussion focusing on last-minute author changes, journal choice disputes and payment of patient authors. Cases tested the boundaries of current best practices and demonstrated how the code could guide best practice and uphold publication ethics.

Empowering publication professionals

As members of cross-functional teams involved in publication development, medical publications professionals are well positioned to advocate for the highest level of integrity; the updated code will continue to support best practice in the field.

Guided poster tour

Attendees also had the opportunity to attend guided poster tours of the following posters:

• What about sex? A call to action for improved sex and gender reporting in industry-sponsored clinical research: results from a literature review – Liz Southey, Olivia Kager, Elena Mills, Laure Nas de Tourris, Emma Vitalini, Alice Witt, Kate Womersley
• Beyond the surface: How are diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) integrated into research and publication strategies? – Anthea Scothern, Kennedy Shaw, Olympia Gianfrancesco, Charlotte Chapman

Roundtable Sessions

Attendees then had the opportunity to participate in a series of roundtable discussions, covering the following topics:

• Harmonizing diverse perspectives to orchestrate real world evidence publishing
• Composing tuned-in medical content for global audiences
• Orchestrating evidence generation and dissemination: The power of diverse steering committees
• What impact will AI and other market factors potentially have on the way publications are resourced into the future?
• In symphony: How the pub professional can bridge silos in integrated evidence planning across the product lifecycle
• Walking the bassline: A new rhythm for commercial interests and medical ethics in patient authorship
• Broadening the impact of medical communications through audio publication enhancements
• Inclusivity in symphony: Orchestrating an accessible future for healthcare communications
• Author agreements to align roles and responsibilities
• Best practices for effective patient communications in rare diseases
• Inclusivity in dialogue: ED&I considerations for enhancing patient partnerships in publications
• Orchestrating omnichannel success in medical affairs: Building the foundation for HCP engagement
• Raise your voice: Orchestrating cross-publisher PLSP guidance
• SLRs: Evolving requirements to ensure publication
• Open forum discussion for newer medical publication professionals
• Finding the rhythm: Achieving excellence in simultaneous congress presentation and high-tier journal publication
• Overcoming the challenges of a virtual workplace

Why not also read our summaries of Day 2 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.

——————————————————–

The 21^st Annual Meeting of ISMPP takes place May 12 – May 14 at the Grand Hyatt in Washington, D.C.

 REGISTER TODAY!
Registration is open until April 25, 2025

The theme for ISMPP’s milestone 21^st Annual Meeting is Diversity and Innovation: In Concert. This meeting gathers diverse professionals to inspire creativity, foster innovation, and advance medical communications for a more inclusive and dynamic future.

Don’t miss the premier medical communications and medical publications conference of 2025!

Topics covered include:

• Artificial Intelligence
• Omnichannel
• Plain Language Summaries
• Best Practices
• Data Visualization
• Publication Planning
• Digital Extenders
• Metrics and Analytics

9 Educational Workshop Offerings – 4 NEW Topics this Year! For both newer professionals and experienced professionals. Spaces are limited so sign up today!

Keynote Speakers, Member Research Posters/Oral Presentations, Exhibitors, Receptions, Networking, Awards, and more!

Company Team Discount/Champion Sponsorship for 10 Team Members or More!

Please contact exh-spon@ismpp.org for a discount code.

VIEW the meeting agenda. REGISTER TODAY!
Learn about ISMPP at: www.ismpp.org

—————————————————–

—————————————————

The 2025 European Meeting of the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) was held in London on 27–29 January. The meeting, which was themed ‘Core Values for an Integrated Age’, saw a record-breaking 418 delegates in attendance.

A summary of the first 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.

Summaries of the second day of the meeting can be found here.

Summaries of Day 1

Chair’s welcome, CMPP update and ISMPP presidential address

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Attendance and engagement at ISMPP EU continue to grow, reflecting an active and collaborative community of medical publications professionals.
• ISMPP’s core values are fundamental as the industry embraces innovation and integrates new technologies.
• The CMPP programme celebrates 15 years of excellence, with increased global representation and accessibility.

Mithi Ahmed-Richards (Taylor & Francis) opened the 2025 European Meeting of ISMPP, recognising the continued growth of the meeting with increasing numbers of abstract submissions and poster presentations. Acknowledging the collaborative spirit of the medical publications community, she emphasised how ISMPP and its members drive advancements in publication practices and ultimately improve patient care. Noting the meeting’s theme of Core Values for an Integrated Age, Ahmed-Richards stressed that trustworthiness surpasses skill and that core values must be demonstrated through actions.

Ann Gordon (Chair of the ISMPP Certification Board) provided an update on the Certified Medical Publication Professional (CMPP) programme, which is celebrating 15 years of professional excellence in medical publications this year. The CMPP community has grown to 1,659 professionals across 31 countries, spanning 6 continents, with South America most recently represented. Achievements in 2024 included the launch of the LearningBuilder certification platform, a significant rise in CMPP mentors, and enhanced accessibility through financial assistance for exam fees. Gordon reinforced the value of the CMPP credential in demonstrating expertise, leadership, and ethical publication practices.

Expanding on the meeting’s theme, Rob Matheis (ISMPP President and CEO) emphasised the importance of balancing core values with innovation, citing the need to consider evolving information sources beyond traditional medical journals. He outlined ongoing key initiatives of the society, including patient membership programmes, a renewed presence in the Asia-Pacific region, and the hosting of #MedComms Day. Matheis concluded with a call for members to actively engage in ISMPP activities to further strengthen the community of medical publication professionals.

Keynote: Finding core values in an integrated and sustainable world

KEY TAKEAWAY

• Andy Pag’s sustainable travel experiments highlight the power of incremental progress and the importance of clear communication in environmental advocacy.

Exploring sustainability: insights from Andy Pag’s adventures

Former BBC journalist and engineer Andy Pag shared his two-decade journey of pioneering sustainable travel. Though often labelled an environmentalist, Pag considers himself an experimenter seeking practical solutions.

Innovative expeditions

Pag’s first major sustainability experiment involved driving from London to Timbuktu in an old Land Rover powered by biodiesel made from waste chocolate. This was considered the first-ever carbon-negative expedition. He later organised the “Grease to Greece” rally, where participants scavenged waste vegetable oil from restaurants to fuel their cars, successfully completing the journey from London to Greece without fossil fuels.

Building on these experiences, Pag set out to travel around the world using sustainable transport. He restored an old school bus and adapted it to run on waste oil, successfully completing the journey while highlighting the potential of alternative fuels.

Lessons in communication

Pag transitioned from experimenter to advocate, emphasising the need for precise messaging. He cautioned that achievements, if not communicated thoughtfully, can be misinterpreted—an insight particularly relevant to medical publication professionals.

The Hero’s journey and scientific method

Pag drew parallels between the hero’s journey—a narrative arc involving a call to adventure, challenges, and transformation—and the scientific method. Both involve exploration, overcoming obstacles, and sharing newfound knowledge.

Trust and incremental progress

Throughout his travels, Pag learned to trust in the kindness of strangers, such as a voluntary military escort in Afghanistan. He advocates for celebrating small advancements in sustainability, recognising that incremental steps collectively lead to significant progress.

Personal choices for reducing carbon footprint

Pag suggests three actions: making sustainable lifestyle choices, supporting policies through voting, and fostering scientific literacy. His experiences serve as a testament to the impact of innovation, communication, and small steps in tackling environmental challenges.

Pag advocates for celebrating small advancements in sustainability, recognising that incremental steps collectively lead to significant progress.

Looking beyond traditional authorship: partnering with patients for inclusion in scientific conferences

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• The role of the patient at scientific conferences has evolved, from exclusion to tokenism to leadership.
• Patients are not conference “guests”, but expert partners helping to shape the future.

The time has come to evolve beyond tokenism and acknowledge patients as experts in their own right.

The first plenary session of the day explored the evolution of patient participation in scientific conferences, from exclusion to tokenism to active leadership. One such leader is patient advocate Mercy Shibemba, who shared her experience of growing up with HIV and the associated stigma. She highlighted the principle of “Nothing for us without us”, and underscored that seminal campaigns such as Undetectable = Untransmissible would not have been possible without meaningful patient engagement.

Amanda Boughey (Envision Pharma Group) reflected on the evolution of patient engagement at ISMPP itself, noting the significant progress made since she started working in MedComms 20 years ago. However, challenges remain: results from an interactive quiz during Boughey’s presentation revealed that the biggest perceived barrier to patient involvement at scientific conferences is concerns around compliance.

Enter self-described “compliance nerd” Rina Newton (Code Clarity). Newton clarified some of the misconceptions surrounding patient participation at scientific conferences, for instance, while EU regulations prohibit direct-to-patient drug advertising, this does not preclude patients from attending conferences, where they may:

• learn about trial findings
• interact with other attendees
• engage with medical stands
• ask questions about medicines
• speak at symposia
• give advice on advisory boards.

Simon Stones (Amica Scientific) stressed the need for stakeholders to proactively argue for patient involvement at conferences, citing the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) congress as an example of good practice. Specifically, we should:

• move beyond tokenism—patients should not be viewed as congress “guests”, but as equal partners shaping the future
• invest in patient leadership
• build a culture of respect by normalising patient involvement
• measure impact.

It should be noted that patient-driven impact metrics may differ from conventional measures of success. Shibemba gave the example of a study of youth-friendly health services for people with HIV that failed to achieve its primary outcome (viral suppression), but was considered successful from the participants’ perspective as it demonstrated the importance of integrated health services.

Pascale Cavillon (Ipsen) explained Ipsen’s patient-driven approach starts with the “why”, using early engagement with patients to establish their unmet needs, before collaborating with patient communities to translate science into meaningful solutions. Cavillon highlighted initiatives such as immersive experience training for healthcare professionals to highlight the lived reality of rare disease.

All panellists agreed that the time has come to evolve beyond tokenism and acknowledge patients as experts in their own right.

Sustaining publication quality in a fast-paced world

KEY TAKEAWAY

• Fast-tracking publications should be reserved for cases of strong justification, and require early, meticulous planning across pharma teams, authors and journals to ensure success.

Expedited publications have become increasingly common, with timelines shrinking from the standard 6 months to as little as 1 month. However, maintaining publication quality requires careful planning, resource allocation, and compliance with Good Publication Practice (GPP) guidelines. During this plenary session, panel members Demetrios Michael (OPEN Health), Karen King (OPEN Health), Sandrine Hardouin (Alexion), Margarita Lens (UCB), Saurabh Gagangras (Novo Nordisk) and Sam Cavana (Taylor and Francis), discussed how to balance speed, quality and compliance when accelerating publication timelines.

Foundation setting

Gagangras likened expedited publications to a dance performance—months of preparation for a precise and rapid execution. Strategic alignment across internal teams is critical. Early engagement with key opinion leaders ensures they are committed to a highly responsive process, while upfront logistical planning—such as completing authorship agreements and pre-submission inquiries—helps avoid delays.

Medical writers should be onboarded early and cover across time zones should be considered. Pre-drafted shell manuscripts and mock figures can allow blinded investigators to review content before database lock. Clear contingency plans for different data outcomes can also help streamline the publication process post-readout.

Compliant author review

Maintaining compliance while expediting timelines requires a structured yet unconventional review process. The panel highlighted the importance of kick-off meetings that clearly define expectations and review timelines, ensuring authors can accommodate shortened deadlines.

The panel also discussed the utility of live review calls to resolve conflicting feedback, and securing calendar dates for these well in advance. Detailed meeting minutes can ensure transparency and compliance while maximising efficiency. Additionally, pre-selecting secondary journal options and understanding the required adaptations in case of rejection helps minimise delays to final publication.

Navigating journal liaison

Cavana provided a publishing perspective on the process. He emphasised that engaging with journals early can smooth the submission and peer review process, but challenges remain, especially in securing reviewers. Cavana advised attendees to consider their use of artificial intelligence (AI) carefully, as well as the adaptability of any potential digital extenders. Journal policies on these aspects can vary widely and might hinder publication or delay the process.

The exception, not the rule

There was unanimous agreement from the panel that expedited publications should remain reserved for cases with strong justification. Examples include areas of unmet needs, Phase III trials supporting regulatory submission, first-in-class drugs, or paradigm-shifting treatments. Fast-track publishing places significant demands on resources and may disrupt ongoing publication plans. Managing stakeholder expectations is also crucial to prevent unrealistic timelines from becoming the norm.

The role of AI

The panel highlighted emerging AI applications could assist the process in the future, and some success has already been demonstrated with plain language summaries (PLS). Other potential uses, such as automated reference management and data validation, are being explored but require further validation to ensure compliance with journal disclosure policies.

Conclusion: need for speed?

 Success in fast-tracking publications involves meticulous preparation, structured review processes, and effective stakeholder communication.

Success in fast-tracking publications involves meticulous preparation, structured review processes, and effective stakeholder communication. While they can accelerate data dissemination, substantial effort is required to balance speed with quality and compliance. It is critical that that these timelines are reserved for rare cases for which there is strong justification.

A discussion on use cases and the adoption of AI within a pharmaceutical, biotech or device company

KEY TAKEAWAY

• Insights from industry highlight AI’s potential to enhance efficiency, quality and value in MedComms.

James Wright (Bioscript Group) led a discussion on the adoption of AI in MedComms with panel members, Pippa Hadland (AstraZeneca), Tom Grant (UCB) and Swati Krishnan (Boehringer Ingelheim). The aim of the session was to further delegates’ understanding of how to use AI in MedComms, by providing insights from the industry perspective.

AI is all around us, but what is it?

Wright opened the session by explaining what AI is. Simply put, AI allows computers and machines to simulate human learning. Indeed, most of us already use AI in our everyday lives, through navigation systems such as Google Maps, virtual assistants, education, and personalisation of online shopping, social media, and online entertainment.

Generative AI can create original content (text, images, video, audio) in response to users’ prompts. Natural Language Processing brings computer science, AI and linguistics together, “enabling computers to understand, interpret, and generate human language in a meaningful and useful way”.

AI in MedComms: panel insights

Several key themes emerged as the panel shared their experiences of developing and using AI for MedComms:

• Use cases – examples of AI tools developed and utilised by panel members included predominantly “low security risk” deliverables such as systematic literature reviews, PLS, and a manuscript first draft proof of concept using published secondary clinical data.
• Efficiency – AI can free-up employees’ time for more strategic tasks while it does the heavy-lifting, eg, summarising large documents, researching new therapy areas, finding details quickly within large quantities of information, or even collating overarching views from 1000s of HCP’s comments in social media.
• Prompts – Wright emphasised that “we get out what we put in” to generative AI, and well-structured prompts are key. UCB have an app that helps with prompt development, and AI can even be prompted to suggest better prompts!
• Quality – while quality may be a common concern, panel members found comparable quality between AI- and human-generated content.
• Value – time-saving with AI may allow budgets to go further, meaning better value for money.
• Data security – maintaining zero risk to patient data, and transparency, are both vital. Security infrastructure around AI is still in its infancy, and represents a challenge, therefore most panel members developed AI tools in-house using closed systems, for “low-risk” projects.
• Industry/agency collaboration – logistical challenges around transparency and security mean that some panel members have kept AI use in-house, while others have formed successful partnerships with trusted vendors.
• Training – experience of AI training comprised a mixture of self-learning through experimentation and online resources, and structured learning through company courses.

AI can free-up employees’ time for more strategic tasks while it does the heavy-lifting. In the future it will likely move beyond low-risk projects to include proprietary data and a wider scope of deliverables.

 What does the future hold for AI in MedComms?

With many companies already testing out AI, in the future it will likely move beyond low-risk projects to include proprietary data and a wider scope of deliverables such as infographics or video content. If one thing is clear from this session, it is that AI in MedComms is here to stay.

Roundtable sessions

Attendees then had the opportunity to participate in roundtables, which covered the following topics:

• Shaping the future of publication metrics
• GenAI in the real world
• AI in scientific publishing: overcoming barriers and bridging perspectives across sectors
• Use of social media in an integrated age
• Inclusive innovation: building a more accessible future in medical education
• Improving publication strategies: bridging standard approaches with innovative, proven frameworks
• Demystifying the submission & guidance for standalone podcast & video articles and extenders
• Cross-publisher plain language article guidance: have your say
• What defines a publication as ‘best-in-class’?
• Strategies for integrated evidence generation throughout product lifecycle: role of the publication professional
• Unlocking omnichannel success: crafting scientific narratives tailored for audiences and persona
• Reformat or reform? Evolving manuscript submission processes to put science first
• Pursuit of parallel publication: potential benefits and current challenges of this growing practice
• Empowering patients in an integrated age: a multidisciplinary approach
• The people’s PubMed: empowering patients in the age of misinformation
• Leveraging AI beyond content creation: creating efficiencies and unlocking possibilities
• Intellectual property and ethical integrity in the digital age: safeguarding publications through collaboration and innovation
• ISMPP code of ethics update: sneak peek and discussion

Guided poster tours

Attendees also had the opportunity to attend guided poster tours of the following posters:

• Analysis of oncologists’ anticipation of and response to clinical data dissemination at ESMO 2023 and ESMO 2024
• Transforming poster metrics: a low-cost, privacy-preserving solution to measure engagement of posters
• Establishing a lay review panel to ensure medical research accessibility
• Practical recommendations for the wider implementation and reporting of sex-specific analyses in medical publications
• Sins of the father: current medical guidance based on retracted articles in the literature
• Beyond agreement: how is non-consensus handled in Delphi panels?
• A survey of the experience, motivations, and added-value of freelance medical writing professionals

Hackathon activity: shaping the future of GPP together!

KEY TAKEAWAY

• Industry-wide collaboration is essential for refining GPP, focusing on AI integration, patient authorship, real world evidence, and enhancing equity, diversity, and inclusion.

In this interactive session, attendees collaborated in groups to explore gaps in GPP 2022 guidelines and discuss key considerations for future GPP iterations, focusing on 6 key topics:

Advancements in AI

Discussions delved into the anticipated impact of AI on medical publishing by 2026. Key recommendations were to:

• define the balance between AI and human authorship, with explicit author agreements
• establish AI disclosure requirements and ethical risk assessments
• ensure AI compliance with confidentiality standards (open vs closed systems)
• adapt GPP guidance to keep pace with rapid AI evolution while maintaining professional oversight.

 Defining publication metrics

Participants examined the evolution of publication metrics, questioning whether existing measures effectively capture engagement and impact. The importance of identifying meaningful metrics, highlighting gaps, and ensuring accurate interpretations of publication success were highlighted.

Enhancing patient involvement

The best way to integrate patient involvement within GPP guidance was discussed. Key considerations included:

• whether to consolidate patient guidance in a dedicated section or distribute it throughout GPP
• establishing onboarding materials to support patient authors
• clarifying compensation terms to avoid legal and ethical conflicts
• ensuring patient involvement is meaningful and adds value to publications.

 Integrating real world evidence (RWE)

Challenges in publishing RWE studies include perception of lower impact, delayed relevance by the time of publication, and complex statistical analyses. Solutions proposed by participants were to:

• strengthen collaboration between RWE study teams and internal stakeholders
• incorporate RWE studies in early-stage research planning
• provide dedicated statistical expertise to ensure robust data analysis.

 Promoting equity, diversity, and inclusion

Discussions underscored the need to embed equity, diversity, and inclusion principles in GPP updates, and recommendations were to:

• use existing journal lexicons to ensure inclusive terminology
• advocate for regional representation in steering committees
• create a congress checklist to evaluate equity, diversity, and inclusion representation in medical meetings
• hold pharma companies accountable for diverse authorship selection.

 The expanding role of social media

Participants supported broader use of social media but stressed the need for clear, industry-wide guidelines on best practices and regulatory considerations.

Participants supported broader use of social media but stressed the need for clear, industry-wide guidelines on best practices and regulatory considerations.

Eline Hanekamp, co-author of the GPP 2022 guidelines, closed the session by emphasising the growing role of AI, the importance of patient involvement, and the evolution of publication metrics. The insights gathered at the Hackathon activity will be presented to the GPP steering committee for consideration when developing the next iteration of GPP.

Finding the story in data: blending data visualisation, storytelling techniques, and new trends while still upholding core values in medical publications (sponsored and presented by HCG)

KEY TAKEAWAY

• Effective storytelling and visualisation techniques enhance data comprehension, making complex information more accessible while maintaining scientific integrity and core values.

Tobias Sturt (Add Two Digital) delivered an insightful talk on the role of storytelling and data visualisation in effectively communicating complex information. The session explored how narrative techniques and visual structure can enhance data interpretation, particularly in medical publications, while ensuring adherence to scientific rigour and ethical standards.

The importance of storytelling in data

Sturt emphasised that the volume and complexity of data in the medical and scientific fields are increasing rapidly. Effective storytelling helps cut through this noise, making information more impactful, understandable, and retainable. Visual storytelling is not about manipulating data but about framing it in a way that clarifies meaning while upholding credibility and trust.

Additionally, he noted that while numbers alone present facts, they often fail to engage audiences. A well-structured story provides context, improving relatability and retention of information. This is particularly critical in medical publications, where complex data must be clearly communicated to diverse audiences.

Principles of data storytelling and visualisation

Understanding the audience’s background and expectations is crucial. Data should be structured like a narrative, focusing on key insights to prevent information overload.

Understanding the audience’s background and expectations is crucial. Data should be structured like a narrative, focusing on key insights to prevent information overload. Selection and emphasis ensure that only the most relevant findings are highlighted. While data itself is factual, effective communication evokes emotions that make information more memorable. Using visual structuring techniques such as contrast, positioning, and colour helps guide the viewer’s attention, ensuring clarity and engagement.

Sturt also stressed the need for progressive disclosure—gradually introducing layers of information rather than presenting everything at once. This allows readers to build understanding step by step, making even highly complex data sets more digestible. Balancing simplicity and depth is key to effective storytelling.

The process: find, design, make, refine

Sturt introduced a four-step methodology for data storytelling:

1. Find – identify the core message within the data.
2. Design – develop a visual framework to present the story effectively.
3. Make – create the actual data visualisation.
4. Refine – test and iterate to improve clarity and impact.

This process ensures that visual storytelling remains purposeful and effective, avoiding the common pitfall of overloading graphics with unnecessary elements that detract from the main message.

Applying visual storytelling in medical publications

Sturt concluded with practical applications for medical and scientific publications, highlighting the importance of maintaining core values such as transparency, accuracy, and ethical responsibility. He discussed ways to ensure clarity in figures and graphs, use infographics to summarise key findings, and adapt storytelling techniques to align with evolving publication formats while preserving scientific rigour.

He also emphasised the role of emerging technologies, such as interactive visualisations and digital platforms, in modern medical publishing. These tools offer new ways to engage readers and convey complex findings dynamically while maintaining the credibility that medical communication demands.

The power of data-driven storytelling

Combining storytelling with data visualisation makes complex medical data clearer and more engaging. Aligning these techniques with ethical standards maintains credibility. As data visualisation evolves, leveraging new storytelling methods while staying true to core values will be essential for enhancing the impact of medical communications.

Want to catch up on events from Day 2 of the meeting? You can read our summaries here.

——————————————————–

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.

——————————————————–

KEY TAKEAWAY

• Open discussion between stakeholders is the key to maintaining transparency and reaching consensus.

Medical writers must often juggle multiple—and sometimes conflicting—requests from various stakeholders, all the while adhering to Good Publication Practice (GPP) guidelines. In a recent poll for their MAP newsletter, the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) asked respondents how they would handle the resurrection of a two-year old real-world evidence (RWE) manuscript. The scenario required respondents to balance the new project owner’s desire to publish promptly with the lead author’s request for additional analysis and author list changes. Dr Eric Y. Wong (Johnson & Johnson Innovative Medicine) summarised and discussed the results of the poll.

The poll asked: You are the medical writer on a real-world evidence (RWE) manuscript that was initiated 2 years ago. The RWE analyses utilise the services of a third-party data analytics company. At first draft stage, the project was put on hold. The project owner has now left the organisation and the manuscript has been transitioned to a colleague. The lead author would like to perform additional analyses and include one of their colleagues as an author. Meanwhile, the new project owner/client would like to finalise and submit the article as soon as possible.

What would you do?

The results of the poll, which was answered by 131 people, were:

• 87.8% – Convene a conference call between all the authors and relevant internal stakeholders to take a consensus on the best way forward. If the new author is added, all authors need to agree, and the new author must review and approve the manuscript draft.
• 10.7% – Explain the value of performing additional analyses (and spending budget with the third-party analytics company) to the new project owner/client, although this will introduce further delays. Include the new author after aligning with all authors/stakeholders.
• 1.5% – Recommend to the lead author to continue with the manuscript in its current state, as the priority for the project owner is to publish as soon as possible and without inclusion of new author.
• 0% – The additional analyses look simple enough. Carry out the calculations in Excel and circulate the updated draft for final approval without including the new author.

Dr Wong concurred with the consensus opinion. A conference call would allow stakeholders—in this case authors and client leads—to discuss, deliberate, and document a range of options and reach consensus. Authorship changes are permissible so long as ICMJE criteria are met; however,  the project sponsor may lack the budget or timeline flexibility for additional analysis. Dr Wong emphasised that any limitations or mitigations (ie, authors agreeing to take on extra work to support the analysis, or timeline excursions) should be clearly documented.

Some respondents chose the option to explain the value of performing additional analysis (despite potential delays). Dr Wong acknowledged that this approach could be a precursor to a conference call. By contrast, he suggested that proposing that the lead author simply accept the manuscript be published as is would exclude other authors’ views. Dr Wong felt that the final option was inappropriate, invalid, and “off-the-cuff”, as only statisticians (or other appropriately trained professionals) should conduct calculations, which may or may not require a new author.

Dr Wong concluded by highlighting the role of the publication professional in stakeholder mediation. As ever, open discussion is the key to success.

————————————————

——————————————————