Question 1

How do I quantify ROI from maintaining an in-house research panel?

Accepted Answer

Quantifying the ROI of an in-house research panel involves measuring how it saves money and adds value compared to not having one. Start by tallying cost savings: calculate what you would have spent on external sample or recruitment fees for all the projects where you instead used your panel. Those avoided costs directly contribute to ROI. Next, factor in speed and efficiency gains — if the panel allows you to complete studies faster (say, cutting a typical project timeline from eight weeks to four), consider the business benefits of those time savings (faster decision-making or quicker product tweaks that might prevent revenue loss). You can also quantify improvements in data quality or engagement: for instance, higher response rates and the ability to run longitudinal studies with the same panelists can lead to better decisions, which translates to avoided mistakes or seized opportunities. By assigning dollar values to these savings and benefits (e.g., cost avoided per project, value of time saved, improved outcomes), you can demonstrate a strong return on investment for maintaining your in-house panel.

Question 2

When should payer research be integrated with medical research studies?

Accepted Answer

Payer research should be integrated with medical research studies whenever reimbursement, coverage criteria, or health economics considerations could influence the success of a new therapy or intervention. For example, in today's value-based care environment, if a clinical study is evaluating a new treatment that will require insurance approval or formulary placement, involving payer insights early on ensures the research captures outcomes payers care about — such as cost-effectiveness, comparative effectiveness, and quality-of-life improvements. In practice, this might involve adding a health economics and outcomes research (HEOR) component or consulting a payer advisory board during the study design to align on value demonstration. This alignment with payer value criteria greatly improves the chances that a successful medical study will translate into favorable coverage decisions and real patient access to the innovation.

Question 3

What compliance issues apply to collecting patient-level data in pharma?

Accepted Answer

Collecting patient-level data in pharmaceutical research comes with strict compliance requirements around privacy and consent, governed by laws like HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act in the U.S.) and GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation in Europe). This means researchers must obtain clear patient consent for any personal data collected and often approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) if it's a study. Personal health information needs to be handled with care: data should be de-identified or anonymized whenever possible, stored securely (encrypted, access-controlled), and used only for the specified research purposes. Regulations also dictate limits on data sharing and retention - for instance, patient data usually cannot be shared with third parties unless appropriately consented and must be deleted or archived safely after the project. Non-compliance can lead to severe penalties, so teams make compliance a priority by following legal guidelines and industry best practices at every step of patient data collection and analysis.

Question 4

Can AI tools improve forecasting for new drug launches?

Accepted Answer

Yes, AI tools can make new drug launch forecasts more sophisticated by analyzing complex patterns across many data sources, but they complement rather than completely replace traditional forecasting. Forecasting a novel drug's uptake is tricky, especially with limited analogs. AI and machine learning can help by processing vast amounts of data — beyond what an analyst could handle — such as patient demographics, physician prescribing behaviors, formulary and insurance data, and even social media or key opinion leader sentiment. For example, an AI model might detect that a drug with a certain efficacy profile and marketing mix follows a launch trajectory similar to past drugs in related categories, adjusting predictions as real-world prescription data starts coming in. This often yields a more nuanced forecast that updates in near real time. However, because every new drug has unique aspects (a novel mechanism, different competition, regulatory nuances), AI predictions need expert oversight. Companies typically use AI-driven forecasts alongside traditional analog-based methods and expert input. The AI improves accuracy by uncovering patterns and early indicators, while human experts ensure the predictions make sense given any one-of-a-kind factors.

Question 5

When do enterprise buyers prefer in-depth interviews to surveys?

Accepted Answer

Enterprise buyers typically prefer in-depth interviews over surveys when they need to explore complex decisions or nuanced feedback in detail. For example, if a company is evaluating a high-stakes B2B solution or an intricate service offering, buyers often opt for one-on-one interviews so they can discuss context, requirements, and concerns in depth — things a multiple-choice survey might gloss over. Interviews allow for probing follow-up questions and storytelling, which helps uncover the 'why' behind responses and surface insights that would be lost in a checkbox format. In essence, whenever the topic is complicated, sensitive, or variable across organizations (such as understanding internal decision dynamics or specialized needs), enterprise stakeholders lean toward qualitative interviews to get richer insight, using surveys mainly when they need quick, quantifiable input at scale.

Enos Answers

Why choose Us

Features and attributes

What is Enos Answers?

Services and Expertise

Market Research FAQs with Expert Insights

How do I quantify ROI from maintaining an in-house research panel?

When should payer research be integrated with medical research studies?

What compliance issues apply to collecting patient-level data in pharma?

Can AI tools improve forecasting for new drug launches?

When do enterprise buyers prefer in-depth interviews to surveys?