Literature DB >> 33258092

Proposed Best Practice Guidelines for Scientific Response Documents: A Consensus Statement from phactMI.

Evelyn R Hermes-DeSantis1, Renee M Johnson2, Alysa Redlich3, Bindi Patel4, Anne Flanigan-Minnick5, Susan Wnorowski6, Mabel M Cortes7, Chang Woo Han8, Elissa Vine9, Hamza Sarwar10, Rita Haydar11, Ahsan Jamil12, Tiffany Huang13, Sonia Kaur Sandhu13, Patrick Reilly14.   

Abstract

The Medical Information Department of a pharmaceutical manufacturer provides written scientific responses to unsolicited requests from healthcare providers for information on products that extends beyond the product labeling (off-label). These scientific response documents are non-promotional, evidence-based, and scientifically balanced, conforming with internal pharmaceutical manufacturer's procedures and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Draft Guidance on Responding to Unsolicited Requests for Off-Label Information. Members of phactMI™ developed this proposal to offer best practices for content generation of scientific response documents. Scientific response documents review available literature to respond to an unsolicited request; therefore, they are similar in nature to systematic reviews. The sections and elements identified in this proposed best practice guidelines for scientific response documents are based on an adaptation of the sections and elements of systematic reviews. The sections of a scientific response document should include a restatement of the unsolicited request (title); a structured summary (abstract); approved indications, black box warnings, and background information when appropriate (introduction); the literature search information and study selection (methods); summation of data from clinical trials, meta-analysis, case reports, and/or real world evidence, as appropriate (results); treatment guidelines, if applicable and available (discussion); and references. Elements for each section should be included in a scientific response document as appropriate, as some elements are not necessary in some documents, based on the question. These elements were selected for inclusion to address any potential concerns of bias and transparency and reflect the intent that scientific response documents should be non-promotional, accurate, truthful, free of commercial bias, scientifically balanced, and evidence based.

Keywords:  Best practices; Medical information; Scientific response documents

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33258092     DOI: 10.1007/s43441-020-00151-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ther Innov Regul Sci        ISSN: 2168-4790            Impact factor:   1.778


  1 in total

1.  The Medical Information Scientific Process: Define, Research, Evaluate, Synthesize, and Share (DRESS).

Authors:  Dominick Albano; Farah Pragga; Rena Rai; Teresa Flowers; Prachi Parmar; Susan Wnorowski; Evelyn R Hermes-DeSantis
Journal:  Ther Innov Regul Sci       Date:  2022-03-03       Impact factor: 1.778

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.