Digital Perspectives Research Findings of Healthcare Professionals

Page 1A CMI/Compas Study

Digital Perspectives of HCPs:

An Excerpt from the CMI/Compas 2013 Media

Vitals

Page 2

CMI/Compas Media Vitals Digital Perspectives of HCPs Excerpt

June 2013

Principal Authors:

Dr. Susan DorfmanChief Marketing & Innovation Officer

James Woodland Chief Operations Officer

Lead Analysts:

Diane DeStefanoMarketing Research Manager

Christine HardySenior Marketing Data Analyst

Ben AttixAssociate Marketing Data Analyst

Contributors:

Jose Ferreira Associate Director, Customer Insights

Carly Kuper VP, Strategic Marketing and Corporate Communications

© 2013 CMI/Compas. All rights reserved.

This document is the propriety and intellectual property of CMI/Compas, Pennsylvania-based corporations. Title and ownership of this document belongs exclusively to CMI/Compas.

No individual, organization or entity may reproduce, distribute or make copies of this document by anymeans, in whole or in part, without the express written permission of CMI/Compas, which, in the event of unauthorized use, shall seek legal redress, including damages and injunctive relief.

Page 3

Executive SummaryIn recent months we have seen conflicting viewpoints and statistics on doctors being on the cutting edge of technology, serving as early adopters of new mobile solutions, and even staying ahead of the curve on technology innovation. We all want to know and understand if and how doctors across multiple specialties are adopting varying technologies, how such adoption translates to use in their professional setting, and most importantly how it impacts a pharmaceutical brand team’s ability to communicate, capture and engage them in these channels. In June 2013, CMI/Compas conducted its inaugural Media Vitals study to assess the varying key factors of physician engagement, uncovering their knowledge seeking and gathering needs, preferences, sources, times of day, and omni-channel touchpoints. The study was conducted by email, using email addresses procured from our media partner DMD, a leading provider of email services to the healthcare community, having delivered over 200 million emails since initiating their service in 2006.

Although the full Media Vitals study will be released to clients in late July 2013, focusing on answers to over 58 questions, the CMI/Compas team wanted to assess a few key specialties and their digital/mobile behaviors/experiences to help our industry make better use of these channels to connect with their targets.

The specialties assessed are:

Specialty Assessed

Cardiology

Endocrinology

Gastroenterology

General Practice/Family Practice

Oncology

Psychiatry

Responder Count

103

103

103

103

104

102

Here is what we found:

Key Findings – Highlights

• Doctors – regardless of specialty – are multi-screen users, relying on multiple devices such as a desktop computer, smartphone, and tablet for both professional and personal use, with lines blurring in their definitions of personal and professional use of these devices.

• Tasks most often performed via a mobile device by a majority of physicians across specialties are all centered on knowledge seeking and gathering.

• The majority of doctors (with the exception of oncologists and psychiatrists) recall ads from a multitude of channels, including print and online journals, conferences, search and digital websites. Mobile is rapidly growing in ad recall success with nearly 3 in 10 doctors reporting becoming aware of ads on their devices.

Page 4

Specialty

Cardiology

Endocrinology

Gastroenterology


Oncology

Psychiatry

Use 3 or more devices for Professional Use

Use 3 or more devices for Personal Use

68%

53%

57%

49%

59%

47%

76%

65%

71%

63%

64%

68%

While desktop computers are used by the highest percentage of physicians in the office setting, smartphones are a close second for cardiologists, gastroenterologists and oncologists. For personal use, smartphones outperform tablets.

Multi-Screen Proliferation

Physicians are increasingly using a combination of devices in both their personal and professional setting, as lines begin to blur as to what constitutes professional and personal info-seeking and gathering behaviors .

This reality and the incredible pace of multi-screen adoption is forcing every sector of the digital economy – publishing, entertainment, and advertising – to rethink how it provides the right environment and screen-specific experiences to its customers while retaining continuity of overall user and brand experiences across those screens.

Page 5

The smartphone is also an important device for each of the 6 specialties, particularly for searching online and accessing drug reference databases (as will be further detailed in the next section of this report – entitled “Tasks Most Often Performed Using Smartphones and/or Tablets.”) For those who use a smartphone for professional purposes, all specialties state to use them an average of 8 times per day or more. Highest users include general practitioners/family practitioners at an average of nearly 15 times per day, followed by cardiologists at an average of 13 times per day.

Smartphones

Physicians are early adopters of smartphones. 78-87% of the physicians in the key specialties examined below use smartphones for personal purposes. That is substantially higher than the national average, which is currently hovering around 50%. Owning a smartphone does not necessarily mean that physicians are using them for professional purposes. In some cases there is a higher than 20 point spread between smartphone owners and users for professional purposes. We predict this will change with the growth of smartphone optimized and accessible tools that lead to treatment efficiency – and marketers will contribute to that growth.

Cardi-ology

Endocrin-ology

Gastroen-terology

General Practice/

Family Practice

Oncology Psychiatry

Smartphone for personal use

0.854 0.806 0.874 0.786 0.856 0.775

Smartphone for professional use

0.796 0.583 0.709 0.583 0.769 0.529

Smartphone for do not use

0.087 0.165 0.107 0.184 0.087 0.216

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%75%85%95%

% o

f P

hys

icia

ns

Cardiology Endocrin-ology

Gastroen-terology

General Prac-tice/

Family Prac-tice

Oncology Psychiatry

Smart phone av-erage

12.9902912621359

8.18446601941747

11.2912621359223

14.8543689320388

12.5673076923077

8.02941176470588

1.03.05.07.09.0

11.013.015.0

% o

f Phy

sicia

ns

Average Smartphone Usage Per Day

Page 6

TabletsThe percentage of tablet users is lower than the smartphone usage rate for obvious reasons. The tablet market is newer and is still far from reaching a point of ubiquity in healthcare and the general population. Physicians are early adopters of tablets, like smartphones. 30% of the adult American population owns tablets, which is much lower than what we see from physicians. The lowering cost, mobility, and relevant applications of tablet devices will be important drivers of future usage for physicians.

Cardi-ology

Endocrin-ology

Gastroen-terology

General Prac-tice/

Family Prac-tice

Oncology Psychiatry

Tablet computer for personal use

0.573 0.515 0.563 0.573 0.5 0.549

Tablet computer for profes-sional use

0.417 0.35 0.379 0.379 0.327 0.343

Tablet computer for do not use 0.32 0.427 0.379 0.388 0.442 0.402

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%

Tablet Use

% o

f Phy

sicia

ns


Gastroen-terology

General Prac-tice/

Family Practice

Oncology Psychiatry

Tablet (e.g., I-Pad) Av-erage

9.00970873786408

4.1747572815534

7.86407766990291

9.13592233009709

7.24038461538462

4.67647058823529

0.5

2.5

4.5

6.5

8.5

% o

f Phy

sicia

ns

For those who use a tablet for professional purposes, the number of times it is used in a day lags behind smartphones. Despite significant adoption, tablets are not yet ubiquitous in medical practices.

Average Times Used Per Day to Access Professional Information

Page 7

DesktopThe desktop computer is the most-used device for professional purposes by physicians across the six specialties presented, and is also most utilized throughout the professional workday than any other reported device. For those who use the desktop for professional purposes, all specialties state to use it an average of 13 times per day or more. Highest users include endocrinologists, general practitioners/family practitioners, and oncologists at an average of roughly 17 times per day, followed by gastroenterologists at an average of 15 per day. Lowest reported daily use was by psychiatrists at an average of 13 times per day.

Cardi-ology

Endocrin-ology

Gastroen-terology

General Prac-tice/

Family Prac-tice

Oncology Psychiatry

Desktop computer for personal use

0.699 0.612 0.68 0.621 0.673 0.637

Desktop computer for profes-sional use

0.893 0.883 0.825 0.699 0.808 0.794

Desktop computer for do not use

0.039 0.058 0.097 0.165 0.058 0.108

5%

25%

45%

65%

85%

Desktop Use

% of

Phy

sicia

nsWhile recent research reports have shown a high percentage of physicians having tablet devices such as iPads, our research indicates that utilization of such devices is slightly lower – for both personal and professional purposes. Most interesting is what doctors perceive to be personal and professional use, as further probing questions on how they use mobile devices such as smart phones and tablets reveal that for many the use of such devices for their professional development, information-seeking and learning is as much a personal activity for some as it is a professional one for others.

For those who do use a tablet for professional purposes, usage is between 4 and 9 times a day, with general practitioners/family practitioners and cardiologists using it the most (on average 9 times per day) and endocrinologists using it the least (at an average of 4 times per day).

Page 8


Gastroen-terology

General Prac-tice/

Family Practice

Oncology Psychiatry

Desktop PC aver-age

14.5922330097087

17.368932038835

15.1359223300971

16.9223300970874

16.8173076923077

13.1372549019608

1.0

3.0

5.0

7.0

9.0

11.0

13.0

15.0

17.0

19.0

% o

f Phy

sicia

ns

Average Times Used Per Day to Access Professional Information

Page 9

Tasks Most Often Performed Using Smartphones and/or Tablets A majority of physicians use their smartphone and tablets to perform a number of tasks while in their professional and personal settings. Which tasks do doctors perform most on their smartphone and/or tablet? Tasks most often performed across selected specialties were identified and detailed from the following list:

• Check formulary status

• Conduct patient education

• Access electronic medical records

• e-prescribing

• Access financial assistance information

• Locate vouchers/coupons

• Drug reference databases

• Diagnostic tools or screening algorithms

• Prescription dosage calculator

• Enter clinical notes

• Receive updates about new products

• Access clinical articles or abstracts

• Remote patient monitoring

• Communicate with patients via email, text or chat

• Update medical records which patients can access

• Read medical news

• Engage with professional social networks

• Visit medical or professional websites

• Access pharmaceutical websites

• Conduct CME

• Watch professional videos

• Download and read article reprints

• Search online

A combination of smartphones and tablets is used by 60-70% of physicians across the 6 specialties for what they perceive as personal and professional use such as searching online, reading medical news and accessing drug medical databases. Surprisingly, receiving updates about new products and accessing pharmaceutical websites also made it to the top of the list (with either a majority or high minority of responding physicians using mobile devices to access this information) of key tasks performed on mobile by the selected group of specialties highlighted in this report. These top tasks are:

• Searching Online

• Reading Medical News

• Accessing Drug Reference Databases

• Visiting Medical or Professional Websites

• Using Diagnostic Tools and Screening Algorithms

• Using Prescription Dosage Calculators

• Receiving New Product Updates

• Accessing Pharmaceutical Websites

• Accessing Clinical Articles and Abstracts

• Downloading and Reading Article Reprints

Page 10

Search Online

Read Medical News

Read medical news via Smartphone

Read medical news via Tablet

Read medical news via Nei-ther

Cardiology 0.553 0.515 0.204

Endocrinology 0.505 0.379 0.282

Gastroenterology 0.544 0.466 0.262


0.398 0.485 0.32

Oncology 0.5 0.365 0.346

Psychiatry 0.422 0.48 0.333

5%15%25%35%45%55%

Tasks Most Performed via Mobile Device

% o

f Phy

sicia

ns

Search online via Smart-phone

Search online via Tablet Search online via Neither

Cardiology 0.553 0.631 0.155



General Practice/Family Prac-tice

0.553 0.534 0.252

Oncology 0.635 0.462 0.24

Psychiatry 0.539 0.529 0.294

5%

25%

45%

65%

Tasks Most Performed via Mobile DeviceA%

of P

hysic

ians

Page 11

Accessing Drug Reference Databases

Visiting Medical or Professional Websites

Drug reference databases via Smartphone

Drug reference databases via Tablet

Drug reference databases via Neither

Cardiology 0.534 0.437 0.291




0.437 0.369 0.388

Oncology 0.529 0.317 0.356

Psychiatry 0.471 0.441 0.324

5%15%25%35%45%55%

Tasks Most Performed via Mobile Device%

of P

hsyc

ians

Visit medical or professional websites via Smartphone

Visit medical or professional websites via Tablet

Visit medical or professional websites via Neither

Cardiology 0.495 0.515 0.252




0.359 0.485 0.388

Oncology 0.462 0.394 0.327

Psychiatry 0.431 0.5 0.343

5%15%25%35%45%55%


% o

f Phy

sicia

ns

Page 12

Using Diagnostic Tools and Screening Algorithms

Using Prescription Dosage Calculators

Diagnostic tools or screen-ing algorithms via Smart-

phone

Diagnostic tools or screen-ing algorithms via Tablet

Diagnostic tools or screen-ing algorithms via Neither

Cardiology 0.388 0.35 0.456




0.388 0.408 0.398

Oncology 0.404 0.279 0.452

Psychiatry 0.225 0.284 0.598

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%

Tasks Most Performed via Mobile Device5

of P

hsyc

ians

Prescription dosage calcula-tor via Smartphone

Prescription dosage calcula-tor via Tablet

Prescription dosage calcula-tor via Neither

Cardiology 0.476 0.291 0.398




0.456 0.301 0.379

Oncology 0.558 0.231 0.365

Psychiatry 0.304 0.245 0.598

5%

25%

45%

65%


% o

f Phy

sici

ans

Page 13

Receiving New Product Updates

Accessing Pharmaceutical Websites

Receive updates about new products via Smartphone

Receive updates about new products via Tablet

Receive updates about new products via Neither

Cardiology 0.417 0.408 0.388




0.369 0.388 0.437

Oncology 0.404 0.317 0.49

Psychiatry 0.363 0.412 0.461

5%15%25%35%45%55%


of P

hsyc

ians

Access pharmaceutical websites via Smartphone

Access pharmaceutical websites via Tablet

Access pharmaceutical websites via Neither

Cardiology 0.262 0.379 0.495




0.359 0.388 0.417

Oncology 0.288 0.288 0.538

Psychiatry 0.353 0.441 0.431

5%15%25%35%45%55%


% o

f Phy

sicia

ns

Page 14

Accessing Clinical Articles and Abstracts

Download and Read Article Reprints

Access clinical articles or abstracts via Smartphone

Access clinical articles or abstracts via Tablet

Access clinical articles or abstracts via Neither

Cardiology 0.35 0.466 0.34




0.34 0.456 0.388

Oncology 0.413 0.413 0.365

Psychiatry 0.284 0.471 0.422

3%8%

13%18%23%28%33%38%43%48%


of P

hysic

ians

Download and read article reprints via Smartphone

Download and read article reprints via Tablet

Download and read article reprints via Neither

Cardiology 0.262 0.447 0.427




0.272 0.427 0.447

Oncology 0.269 0.365 0.49

Psychiatry 0.206 0.392 0.52

5%15%25%35%45%55%


% o

f Phy

sici

ans

Page 15

Likelihood and Use of Digital Information Sources

Responders across all specialties demonstrated to be high information seekers and gatherers, using a multitude of sources based on varying needs and degrees of criticality to access information. Search and medical databases were stated as the most likely used by physicians across all specialties when needing immediate information requiring an answer within 10 minutes. For non-immediate needs, where 1 to 2 days to gather information is ample, a majority of physicians chose digital resources that included the use of online medical journals as well as professional websites and online communities.

Likelihood and Criticality of Using Search EnginesA high majority of physicians across all specialties rely on search engines to address immediate knowledge needs, requiring an answer within 10 minutes. Eighty-seven percent of endocrinologists and 83% of psychiatrists represent the top two specialties relying on search for immediate access to information, followed by cardiologists. Additionally, we see that over 30% of physicians also use search for less immediate information seeking, allowing for 1-2 days to find an answer to a specific medical question.

The implications of this are vast, as the full 21 specialty study also reveals that physicians search an average of three times per day; seek medical information before, during and after work hours; use specific HCP terms in their searches; and are increasingly aware of advertising presented through search results. A strong search engine marketing and optimization strategy, both for paid and natural searches, is critical, along with in-depth knowledge of top competitors and third-party content sites displayed in response to relevant search strings. When using search engines, physicians are looking for answers to specific questions. It is important for Pharma to understand what physicians may be looking for when using certain keywords and phrases to ensure that the linked content answers the primary question. Content relevancy is extremely important after search conversion.

Cardio-logy

Endo-crin-ology

Gastro-enterol-ogy

General Prac-tice/

Family Practice

Oncology Psychi-atry

Immediate need - requires an answer within 10 minutes

0.789 0.871 0.75 0.75 0.743 0.832

Non-immediate need - requires an answer in 1 to 2 days

0.326 0.327 0.36 0.31 0.366 0.337

Educational/long term needs - filling in gaps and updating

0.116 0.198 0.14 0.2 0.198 0.228

5%

25%

45%

65%

85%

Likelihood and Criticality of Search

% of

Phs

ycian

s

Page 16

Likelihood and Criticality of Using Medical DatabasesLike search, the use of medical databases is high amongst physicians across specialties in response to meeting immediate knowledge needs, accessing critical medical information within 10 minutes. Similarly, over 30% of these physicians also use Search for non-immediate needs allowing one to two days to get an answer. Oncologists, gastroenterologists and endocrinologists represent the top users of medical databases when needing a more immediate answer, at 79%, 76% and 75% respectively. Interestingly, although not surprisingly, only 58% of psychiatrists state they use Search to get more immediate answers, with 48% also using Search for non-immediate needs (representing the top specialty in this category, followed by gastroenterologists at 40%).

Cardio-logy

Endo-crin-ology

Gastro-enterol-ogy

General Prac-tice/

Family Practice



0.726 0.745 0.755 0.612 0.788 0.583


0.337 0.469 0.398 0.367 0.343 0.479


0.211 0.255 0.255 0.296 0.242 0.24

5%

25%

45%

65%

85%

Likelihood and Criticality of Medical Databases

% of

Phy

sician

s

Likelihood and Criticality of Using Online Medical JournalsThe use of online medical journals, one of the top sources physicians use to stay on top of medical developments (as shown again this year in the full 21-specialty study), is predominately used across all specialties for non-immediate needs requiring an answer in one to two days, as well as fulfilling long-term education needs and even immediate knowledge needs requiring answers in under 10 minutes.

Certain specialties show a high minority of physicians accessing online journals for immediate knowledge needs, requiring an answer within 10 minutes. These include endocrinologists (46%), oncologists (45%) and cardiologists (44%). Psychiatrists (51%) on the other hand, use online medical journals to fulfill their long-term educational needs, followed by a high minority of general practice/family practice physicians (41%) and endocrinologists (40%).

The implications of such uses reinforces the need for digital and mobile sites to be optimized for user experience and enablement of quick and effortless search and information retrieval functionality. Also important is for brand teams to consider partnering with key medical journals to enable owned content planning and placement as part of their overall paid digital media engagement strategy.

Page 17

Cardio-logy

Endo-crin-ology

Gastro-enterol-ogy

General Prac-tice/

Family Practice



0.443 0.462 0.286 0.196 0.449 0.263


0.485 0.549 0.571 0.557 0.49 0.495


0.268 0.396 0.337 0.412 0.316 0.505

5%15%25%35%45%55%

% of

Phy

sician

s

Likelihood and Criticality of Using Online Reference PublicationsOnline reference publications are utilized by a majority of endocrinologists (53%), as well as a high minority of remaining specialties when an immediate answer is needed. The majority of psychiatrists (58%), oncologists (52%), cardiologists (50%), and gastroenterologists (50%) rely on these online reference publications for less immediate needs, with nearly 40% of endocrinologists and psychiatrists also using these publications for longer-term education needs.

Cardio-logy

Endo-crin-ology

Gastro-enterol-ogy

General Prac-tice/

Family Practice



0.479 0.533 0.474 0.446 0.484 0.389


0.5 0.467 0.495 0.413 0.516 0.579


0.266 0.391 0.242 0.304 0.258 0.368

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%

% of

Phy

sician

s

Likelihood and Criticality of Online Medical Journals

Likelihood and Criticality of Online Reference Publications

Page 18

Likelihood and Criticality of Using Pharma Company Websites

In a surprising finding, our research also uncovered that Pharma company websites are utilized by 53% of psychiatrists when seeking information requiring an answer in one to two days. Similar utilization is also seen in a high minority of gastroenterologists (48%), general practitioners/family practice (48%), and cardiologists (42%). Interestingly, a high minority of endocrinologists (44%) and oncologists (42%) rely on Pharma websites when seeking immediate answers.

Like medical publishers, pharmaceutical companies need to consider investing in both content and device readiness to ensure that when physicians access their sites for immediate and longer-term needs there is ample information that is relevant, easy to find and download as needed.

Cardio-logy

Endo-crin-ology

Gastro-enterol-ogy

General Prac-tice/

Family Practice



0.373 0.443 0.31 0.303 0.42 0.341


0.422 0.392 0.483 0.483 0.364 0.534


0.265 0.304 0.276 0.348 0.307 0.295

5%15%25%35%45%55%

% of

Phy

sician

s

Likelihood and Criticality of Using Professional Websites and Online Communities

Professional websites and online communities are also used to address physicians’ non-immediate knowledge needs, particularly with a majority of psychiatrists (57%), endocrinologists (54%), gastroenterologists (53%), and cardiologists (51%). Additionally, approximately 3 out of every 10 physicians also use professional websites and online communities to get immediate answers to their medical questions as well as longer-term educational needs.

Likelihood and Criticality of Pharma Company Websites

Page 19

Cardio-logy

Endo-crin-ology

Gastro-enterol-ogy

General Prac-tice/

Family Practice



0.367 0.333 0.225 0.301 0.33 0.298


0.511 0.536 0.528 0.43 0.489 0.574

Educational/Long term needs - filling in gaps and updating

0.211 0.369 0.326 0.355 0.375 0.34

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%

% of

Phy

sician

s

And Where Do Doctors Notice Ads Most?

Similar to physicians’ multi-channel info-seeking and gathering behaviors, a majority of responding physicians (regardless of specialty) state that they notice brand advertising in and across multiple channels. While visibility of advertising in medical conferences and print journals capture higher percentages of physicians, direct mail, digital (including medical websites and digital journals) and search engines are not too far behind. We are also seeing mobile advertising capturing early ad awareness with a mid-minority, as this channel gets more utilization within Pharma.

As increasing saturation of brand messages continues to proliferate across channels and vehicles, it will become much more important for brands to earn their attention and engagement with physicians rather than trying to command it. Content planning as well as strong value propositions to stimulate interest and curiosity in the brand will be key to accomplish this.

Likelihood and Criticality of Professional Websites/Online Communities

Page 20

Cardiology Reading medical

journals on-line

Cardiology Reading medical

journals in print

Cardiology While at-

tend-ing a med-ical con-fer-ence or meeting

Cardiology Visiting medical

news web-sites

Cardiology Using a

search en-gine

Cardiology Looking

through the mail

Cardiology Using your

mobile phone

Notice Ads Fre-quently/ Often When:

0.533980582524272

0.660194174757281

0.58252427184466

0.514563106796116

0.495145631067961

0.553398058252427

0.359223300970874

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%

Notice Ads Frequently/ Often When:

% o

f Phy

sicai

ns

Ad Awareness Ranking1. Print Medical Journals 2. Medical Conferences3. Direct Mail4. Online Medical Journals5. Medical Websites6. Search7. Mobile Phone

Cardiology

Endocrinologists

Endocrinol-ogy Reading

medical journals on-

line

Endocrinol-ogy Reading

medical journals in

print

Endocrinol-ogy While

attend-ing a med-ical con-fer-ence or meeting

Endocrinol-ogy Visiting

medical news web-

sites

Endocrinol-ogy Using a search en-

gine

Endocrinol-ogy Looking through the

mail

Endocrinol-ogy Using

your mobile phone


0.524271844660194

0.660194174757281

0.640776699029126

0.524271844660194

0.514563106796116

0.611650485436893

0.339805825242719

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%

Chart Title

% o

f Phy

sian

s

Ad Awareness Ranking1. Print Medical Journals 2. Medical Conferences3. Direct Mail4. Tied:

5. Search6. Mobile Phone

a. Online Medical Journalsb. Medical Websites

Page 21

Oncology

General practitioners/Family Practice

General Practice/

Family Prac-tice Reading

medical journals on-

line

General Practice/

Family Prac-tice Reading

medical journals in

print

General Practice/

Family Prac-tice While

attend-ing a med-ical con-fer-ence or meeting

General Practice/

Family Prac-tice Visiting

medical news web-

sites

General Practice/

Family Prac-tice Using a search en-

gine

General Practice/

Family Prac-tice Looking through the

mail

General Practice/

Family Prac-tice Using

your mobile phone


0.54368932038835

0.621359223300971

0.640776699029126

0.504854368932039

0.456310679611651

0.601941747572816

0.320388349514563

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%

Chart Title

% o

f Phy

sici

ans

Ad Awareness Ranking1. Medical Conferences2. Print Medical Journals 3. Direct Mail4. Online Medical Journals5. Medical Websites 6. Search7. Mobile Phone

Oncology Reading medical

journals on-line

Oncology Reading medical

journals in print

Oncology While at-


Oncology Visiting medical

news web-sites

Oncology Using a

search en-gine

Oncology Looking

through the mail

Oncology Using your

mobile phone


0.538461538461538

0.615384615384615

0.528846153846154

0.451923076923077

0.461538461538462

0.519230769230769

0.326923076923077

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%

Chart Title

% o

f Phy

sici

ans

Ad Awareness Ranking1. Print Medical Journals 2. Online Medical Journals3. Medical Conferences4. Direct Mail5. Search6. Medical Websites 7. Mobile Phone

Page 22

Psychiatry

Ad Awareness Ranking1. Print Medical Journals 2. Direct Mail3. Medical Conferences4. Medical Websites 5. Online Medical Journals6. Search7. Mobile Phone

Psychiatry Reading medical

journals on-line

Psychiatry Reading medical

journals in print

Psychiatry While at-


Psychiatry Visiting medical

news web-sites

Psychiatry Using a

search en-gine

Psychiatry Looking

through the mail

Psychiatry Using your

mobile phone


0.411764705882353

0.627450980392157

0.5 0.431372549019608

0.401960784313725

0.53921568627451

0.264705882352941

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%

Chart Title

% o

f Phy

sici

ans

Gastroenterology

Ad Awareness Ranking1. Print Medical Journals 2. Medical Conferences3. Direct Mail4. Online Medical Journals5. Medical Websites 6. Search7. Mobile Phone

Gastroen-terology Reading medical journals online

Gastroen-terology Reading medical

journals in print

Gastroen-terology While at-tending a medical

conference or meeting

Gastroen-terology Visiting medical

news web-sites

Gastroen-terology Using a

search en-gine

Gastroen-terology Looking through the mail

Gastroen-terology

Using your mobile phone

Notice Ads Fre-quently/ Of-ten When:

0.533980582524272

0.669902912621359

0.679611650485437

0.572815533980582

0.446601941747573

0.543689320388349

0.378640776699029

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

% o

f P

hys

icia

ns

Notice Ads Frequently/ Often When:

Page 23

Want the Full Report?

Please contact your CMI/Compas media or account lead or [email protected] to purchase your copy of the full 21-specialty CMI/Compas Media Vitals annual report.

The 21-specialty CMI/Compas Media Vitals annual report consists of over 58 questions related to multi-channel knowledge seeking and gathering behaviors, preferences, needs and sources, including questions related to the following topics:

• Electronic Medical/Health Records (EMR/EHR)• Conferences• Most used sources to stay abreast of medical information • Rep Access• Online Preferred Sources• Offline Sources• Needs from Pharma • Reprints• Video• And many more insights into physician media preferences

All insights span across the following specialties:

1. Allergy/ Immunology2. Cardiology3. Dermatology4. Emergency Medicine5. Endocrinology6. Gastroenterology7. General Practice/Family Practice8. General Surgery9. Infectious Disease10. Internal Medicine

11. Nephrology12. Neurology13. Obstetrics and Gynecology 14. Oncology15. Ophthalmology16. Orthopedic Surgery17. Pediatrics18. Pulmonology19. Psychiatry20. Rheumatology21. Urology

Page 24

ByDoctor® is the industry’s only HCP-level multi-channel promotional access and affinity database covering over 1.3 million prescribers. This promotional insights and modeling database allows CMI/Compas and its customers to better plan engagement by uncovering the best promotional path to access target audiences, understand HCP promotional affinity, and own the audience. ByDoctor® represents a unique, media-neutral, customer-centric dataset for brand planning, execution and measurement that empowers pharmaceutical marketing and sales teams to augment their audience knowledge, advance prescriber access, and close the promotional loop between promotional dollars spent and the return on objectives and investments – down to the individual prescriber level.

About Our ByDoctor® OnDemandSM and Custom Research Capabilities

CMI/Compas would like to thank DMD for facilitating the procurement of HCP email addresses for use in this study. DMD is the leading provider of email services to the healthcare community. DMD provides digital intelligence about healthcare markets by connecting marketers to practitioners through hyper-targeted email deployment services. Its email database covers upwards of 85% of targeted audiences and is drawn on a continuous basis from publishing and health care service partners on an opt-in basis. DMD mines campaign results to yield proprietary insights for its clients about the digital behavior of their audiences that drives increasing returns on their marketing investments.

Acknowledgements

About CMI/Compas

Well-known as a media planning and buying organization for healthcare clients, sister agencies Communications Media, Inc. (CMI) and Compas, Inc. together form the indispensable strategic marketing partner to the world’s game-changers in health, offering guidance at every level of marketing. CMI/Compas focuses on core service offerings of Media Planning, Innovation, Customer Insights, Technology, and Buying. CMI/Compas is laser-focused on helping clients move the promotional needle. CMI/Compas has offices in Philadelphia; King of Prussia, PA; Pennsauken, NJ; and New York, NY.

Date post:	23-Dec-2014
Category:	Healthcare
Upload:	cmicompas
View:	44 times
Download:	0 times