KOL and DOL Mapping and Insight Reporting
Pubrica maps key opinion leaders and digital opinion leaders and designs insight reporting for medical affairs teams. Our medical affairs analysts build each map from published and public evidence of influence, including publications, guideline committee membership, trial leadership, society office and digital reach. The map shows what each expert works on as well as their seniority, and we keep it current through scheduled refreshes.
- Built from published evidence of influence, including authorship, guideline committees, trial leadership, society roles and editorial positions
- Never based on prescribing data, because prescribing data turns a scientific exercise into commercial targeting
- Digital opinion leaders included where they matter, since in several fields the clinicians shaping practice do not hold senior academic positions
- Data protection position stated, because profiling named clinicians in the EU or UK is processing personal data and requires a lawful basis and a transparency position
- Mapped by topic, not only by rank, because the right adviser for a renal question is often not the best-known name in the indication
Influence evidenced from published sourcesIncluded
Mapped by topic and by networkIncluded
Data protection position addressedIncluded
Insight reporting structureIncluded
Ranking by prescribing volumeNot offered
Topic → evidence → mapped → network → engaged
- Influence supported by evidence
- No prescribing data used
- Mapped by topic as well as rank
- GDPR position documented
- Refreshed rather than rebuilt
Deliverables
Four Components of Every KOL Mapping Engagement
A useful map identifies relevant experts and evidence that your team has not already found.
Example from a mapA ranking without evidence reproduces the experts the team already knew. The evidence identifies the experts the team had not yet found.
Example from a topic mapTier 1 national experts, ranked.Renal impairment subgroup: four clinicians with published work in this population, two of whom sit on the guideline group currently reviewing it. None appears in the top ten by overall citation, which is why the ranked list missed them.
Example from project scopingGDPR applies to KOL mapping because it involves processing personal data about named individuals.
Example from an insight reportOverall sentiment toward the product is positive.Eleven of nineteen interactions this quarter raised the same question about the renal subgroup, six of them unprompted. Three mentioned the same competitor analysis. That is an evidence gap and a publication priority.
The samples shown are illustrative and anonymised. Hover over a sample to replay it.
Compliance and Standards
KOL Mapping Standards: GDPR, PhRMA Code and ICMJE
Mapping named individuals is a data protection activity as well as a medical affairs one.
Data protection (and the UK GDPR)
Profiling named clinicians means processing personal data about identifiable people who have not volunteered it. A lawful basis and a transparency position are required, and both are often missing from mapping proposals.
PhRMA Code (and the OIG speaker program alert)
The Code revisions effective January 2022 responded directly to the OIG Special Fraud Alert of November 2020. The alert’s suspect characteristics, including minimal educational content, alcohol, unsuitable venues, repeat attendance, sales-influenced speaker selection and compensation above fair market value, define the boundary.
ICMJE Recommendations (authorship and disclosure)
Sets four criteria, all of which each author must meet. Contributors who do not meet all four are acknowledged. Employment by the sponsor neither qualifies nor disqualifies anyone.
Quality management (cert. H3CR9TCU20251212INDQM10N)
Our certified quality system governs how work is run, recorded and released.
Responsible Use of AI
Our Approach to AI Use in KOL Mapping
Medical affairs work must distinguish scientific exchange from promotion, a boundary that regulators monitor. That judgement depends on context, jurisdiction and the individuals involved, so it is always made by our specialists rather than by an AI tool.
Why We Do Not Publish AI Accuracy Figures
Accuracy figures for AI tools are usually reported by the companies that sell them.
Pubrica therefore does not quote a self-generated accuracy figure, because it would carry the same conflict of interest. Instead, we tell you which tool was used on your project, at which stage, and what a specialist changed afterwards.
Our Process
How Our KOL Mapping Process Works
We define the scientific questions first. A map built without them becomes a ranked list of well-known names.
Questions and scope
We establish the scientific questions the programme needs answered, the geographies in scope and the data protection position.
Evidence gathering
We gather publication records, guideline memberships, trial leadership, society roles and digital presence from published sources.
Map
We map experts by topic and by network, showing who works with whom and where clusters exist, not only who ranks highest.
Insight reporting
We design a reporting structure so that interactions are fed back as specific questions with decisions attached.
Our Experts
Your KOL Mapping Team
A named team of subject specialists stays with your project from scoping to delivery. Your project coordinator introduces each team member by name before work begins.
Reviews the scientific content for accuracy and confirms that each conclusion is supported by the evidence. Each expert is matched to your field.
Writes the content against the brief and the applicable code of practice, with every claim traceable to its reference.
Reviews the content for scientific accuracy, fair balance and compliance with the applicable code before it reaches your internal review.
Manages the timeline, keeps you informed at each stage and coordinates the team so that questions are answered and deadlines are met.
Packages
KOL Mapping Packages
Costs depend on the breadth of the therapy area, the number of geographies and the depth of the profiles.
Expert mapping
For an indication in defined markets
Quoted per projectBased on therapy area and geography
Delivery Agreed at scoping
- ✓Scientific questions defined first
- ✓Influence evidenced from published sources
- ✓Mapped by topic and by network
- ✓Digital opinion leaders where relevant
- ✓Data protection position documented
- ✓Delivered as a working file
We do not use prescribing data. If your project requires it, we are not the right supplier.
Deliverables Request a quoteInsight reporting
Structured reporting of interactions
Quoted per projectBased on interaction volume
Delivery Scheduled
- ✓Capture taxonomy designed
- ✓Reporting format for medical leadership
- ✓Recurring questions surfaced, not averaged
- ✓Route into the medical and publication plans
- ✓Quarterly synthesis
The useful unit is a specific question from a specific setting that recurs. Sentiment scores do not provide this.
Deliverables Request a quoteScheduled refresh
For maps already in use
Quoted per projectBased on refresh interval
Delivery Scheduled
- ✓New publications and roles added
- ✓Guideline committee changes tracked
- ✓Emerging experts identified
- ✓Network changes flagged
- ✓Retention reviewed against the data protection position
Identifying emerging experts is the most valuable part of a refresh, as established names change little.
Deliverables Request a quoteSend one scientific question and a market, and we will map the evidenced experts at no cost so you can compare the result with your existing list.
FAQs
Frequently Asked Questions About KOL Mapping
If your question is not answered here, please ask an expert. No quote is required.
No. Ranking clinicians by prescribing volume turns scientific engagement into commercial targeting, which regulators treat as a red flag.
We evidence influence from published sources, including authorship, guideline roles, trial leadership, society office and editorial positions.
Mapping named clinicians in the EU or UK is processing personal data about identifiable people who have not volunteered it. It requires a lawful basis and a transparency position.
We document the position as part of the project. Because the processing is yours, your data protection function signs it off, and we address it from the start.
In several therapy areas, yes. The clinicians influencing how peers practise increasingly do not hold traditional positions.
The evidence is different, covering reach, engagement and the professional standing of the audience rather than citation counts, so it is assessed separately.
Internal lists tend to reproduce the experts the team already knows.
An evidence-based map identifies experts the team has not met, particularly for specific subgroup questions where the relevant expert is rarely the most prominent name.
Related Services
Related Medical Affairs Services
Identifying the right experts supports most other medical affairs activities.
1ADVISORY AND FIELD WORKdownstream
Advisory boardsSelecting and inviting advisers. MSL and field medicalPlanning field engagement.2STRATEGY AND PLATFORMupstream
Medical affairs strategyDefining the questions that need answers. Scientific platformDefining what the evidence supports.3PUBLICATIONS AND CONGRESSESinsight use
Publication planningTurning recurring questions into publications. Congress and symposium contentSelecting congress faculty.Request a Free Expert Map for One Scientific Question
You can compare the result directly with your existing expert list.