Compare 9 Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus medical affairs teams. See how your team stacks up to the market leader
In the EU5, several of the Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus medical affairs teams we surveyed are running neck and neck with at least one rival. The 150 diabetologists we polled say that nearly every team needs improvement in two or more areas, but are those targeted improvements enough to put your team ahead of the competition?
Discover all the ways you can improve your medical affair services in Medical Affairs Reputations: Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (Orals) (EU5). Comparing 9 major Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (Orals) treatments from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen Cilag, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Takeda, this detailed report reveals:
- How diabetologists rate your team overall, and on 12 key medical affairs services.
- Which medical affairs services are most important.
- What you can do to improve your medical affairs services.
- How, and how often diabetologists want to meet with your team.
Interested in the US market? Click here to see the US Edition.
- Can the runaway leader at the top be chased down? Nearly 10 points separate the leading brand from second place in terms of overall quality of interactions. Is it really a race for second place or can brands make up with significant lead.
- Information is the #1 priority. The most important medical affairs services all relate to providing information that doctors can use to make better treatment decisions.
- Huge variations in activity. In the past six months, only 1 of the 9 teams interacted with more than 70% of doctors surveyed, and the least active teams saw no more than 29% of them.
- Doctors want to see teams in-person and not too often. The report reveals how, and how frequently your team should engage.
- Digital interaction still some way off becoming the norm. For the most part, doctors want personal interactions, not emails or phone calls. Does this align with your strategy?
- Forxiga (dapagliflozin; AstraZeneca)
- Glyxambi (empagliflozin/linagliptin; Eli Lilly/Boehringer Ingelheim)
- Invokana (canagliflozin; Janssen Cilag)
- Januvia (sitagliptin; Merck Sharp & Dohme)
- Jardiance (empagliflozin; Eli Lilly/Boehringer Ingelheim)
- Onglyza (saxagliptin; AstraZeneca)
- Qtern (saxagliptin/dapagliflozin; AstraZeneca)
- Trajenta (linagliptin; Eli Lilly/Boehringer Ingelheim)
- Vipidia (alogliptin; Takeda)
Developed with the help of medical affairs specialists, this report gives you an in-depth comparison of 9 medical affairs teams—answering important questions like:
What do physicians need?
- How, and how often are they using your medical affairs team?
- What services do they consider most important?
- How often should you contact them? What channels are best?
- How memorable are your team’s interactions with doctors?
- How do doctors rank your team for performance and satisfaction in 12 key areas?
- How does your team compare to the competition—in each area, and overall?
- Are you delivering the services that are most important to doctors?
- Where do you need to improve?
- How can your team enhance its services?
We surveyed 150 diabetologists from the EU5 (France, Italy, Germany, Spain, UK)—chosen from the largest community of validated physicians in the world.
- Have been practicing for between 3 and 35 years
- See at least 5 patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in a typical month
- Devote at least 50% of their time to direct patient care
- Have interacted with at least one listed product’s medical affairs team in the past 6 months.
2. Current Status of Interactions with Different Medical Affairs Teams
2.1 Interactions in the past 6 months with Medical Affairs teams for each product
2.2 Current frequency of interactions with medical affair teams for each product
3. Competitive Evaluation of Medical Affairs Teams Performance on Various Attributes
3.1 Evaluation of overall quality of interactions with Medical Affairs teams for each product
3.2 Attribute importance of Medical Affairs teams roles to physicians’ practice
3.3 EdgeMap analysis – Competitive evaluation on Medical Affairs teams performance on attributes
3.4 Competitive evaluation of physicians satisfaction of interaction with Medical Affairs teams
3.5 Need-Gap analysis by product
4. Preferred Interaction Media, Frequency, and Suggestions for Improvement
4.1 Preferred interaction media and frequency, and suggestions for improvement