MSL and Field Medical Materials
Pubrica develops MSL and field medical materials and MSL training for field medical teams. Field medical materials must carry the science accurately, stay within the boundary of scientific exchange and prepare MSLs for questions the materials do not cover. Our field medical writers prepare the core scientific deck, reactive response sets and reference materials, and deliver scenario-based training that prepares MSLs to use them.
- Built from the scientific platform, so what the field team says matches what the programme supports, and any difference is visible
- Reactive-use materials marked as reactive, because the distinction between responding to a question and raising a topic defines the boundary
- Training on difficult questions, including off-label use, comparative efficacy and competitor results that appear stronger than yours
- Insight capture built into the material, so what the field team hears is returned in a form the organisation can act on
- Clear examples of the compliance boundary, with worked examples of scientific exchange and promotion rather than a general principle
Materials built from the platformIncluded
Reactive and proactive use markedIncluded
Training on unscripted questionsIncluded
Insight capture designed inIncluded
Promotional content for field medicalNot offered
Platform → materials → trained → exchange → insight
- Built from the scientific platform
- Reactive use marked as reactive
- Difficult questions covered in training
- Insight capture designed in
- Boundary shown through examples
Deliverables
Four Components of Every Field Medical Package
Materials are only part of field preparation. MSLs also need training for conversations that go beyond the deck.
Example from a traceability checkNew claims appear in field materials more often than anywhere else, because decks are built around conversations rather than source documents.
Example from a material setOne deck, all content, use as appropriate.Core scientific deck: may be presented. Reactive response set: used only in response to an unsolicited question on that topic, with the question recorded. Off-label enquiries: routed to medical information, not answered from the deck.
Example from a training programmeCompliance and credibility are both decided in these moments, yet training often skips them in favour of a walkthrough of the materials.
Example from an insight formHCP had concerns about efficacy.Nephrologist, tertiary centre: asks whether the renal-impairment subgroup was pre-specified, because the local formulary committee raised it. Third time this has come up this quarter. That is an evidence gap with a decision attached to it.
The samples shown are illustrative and anonymised. Hover over a sample to replay it.
Compliance and Standards
Field Medical Standards: PhRMA Code, GPP 2022 and ICMJE
Scientific exchange is not promotion, but it is bounded by promotional rules.
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.
GPP 2022 (good publication practice)
The 2022 update replaces GPP3. It covers company-sponsored research, including translational, biomarker and real-world studies, and extends to preprints, plain language summaries and social media. Professional medical writing support is legitimate, provided it is disclosed.
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 Field Medical Materials
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 Field Medical Process Works
We start with the scientific platform. Materials built before the platform exists tend to become the platform by default.
Platform and boundary
We confirm the scientific platform as the source and agree the reactive and proactive boundary with medical and compliance teams.
Materials
We prepare the core scientific deck, reactive response sets and reference materials, each traced to the platform and marked for its permitted use.
Training
We deliver scenario-based training on unscripted questions, in which MSLs practise the escalation routes.
Insight capture
We design the capture structure with a route back into the medical plan, so insights lead to action.
Our Experts
Your Field Medical 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
Field Medical Packages
Costs depend on the number of materials, the size of the field team and the number of markets adapting them.
Field medical materials
For a field team in one indication
Quoted per projectBased on material count
Delivery Agreed at scoping
- ✓Core scientific deck from the platform
- ✓Reactive response sets, marked
- ✓Reference and back-up slides
- ✓Every statement traced to evidence
- ✓Permitted use stated per asset
- ✓Affiliate adaptation guidance
Where no scientific platform exists, we will tell you, because otherwise the deck becomes the platform without anyone deciding that it should.
Deliverables Request a quoteMSL training
For new teams or new data
Quoted per projectBased on team size and format
Delivery Agreed at scoping
- ✓Scientific training on the evidence
- ✓Scenario training on unscripted questions
- ✓Boundary worked through by example
- ✓Escalation routes practised
- ✓Assessment and refresher materials
Scenario practice is what MSLs apply in real conversations. A walkthrough of the deck is not training.
Deliverables Request a quoteInsight system
For making field intelligence usable
Quoted per projectBased on team size and reporting need
Delivery Agreed at scoping
- ✓Capture structure designed
- ✓Taxonomy for themes and questions
- ✓Reporting format for medical leadership
- ✓Route into the medical and publication plans
- ✓Training on what a usable insight looks like
Most insight programmes collect sentiment. The useful unit is a specific question from a specific setting, with a decision behind it.
Deliverables Request a quoteSend your current field deck and we will trace every claim to a source at no cost. Claims that originate in a field deck are the ones to identify.
FAQs
Frequently Asked Questions About MSL and Field Medical Materials
If your question is not answered here, please ask an expert. No quote is required.
The practical markers are who raised the topic, whether the content is balanced, whether it stays within what the evidence supports, and whether the interaction is documented as scientific.
The boundary is easier to teach through worked examples than through principles, so our training uses scenarios rather than definitions.
MSLs may respond to an unsolicited question within a defined process, with the response provided by medical information rather than improvised during the conversation.
Raising off-label use proactively is not scientific exchange. The framework depends on the distinction between responding and raising.
Follow your own SOP. Many organisations route field medical materials through medical review rather than full MLR, because they are non-promotional.
Whichever route you use should be documented and consistent, because an inconsistent review history is itself a finding.
This usually happens because the deck was built as a presentation rather than as a resource for a conversation that the clinician directs.
The solution is a short core narrative supported by detailed reference material and reactive sets, with training on moving between them, rather than a longer deck.
Related Services
Related Medical Affairs Services
Field medical work applies the scientific platform in real conversations with clinicians.
1SOURCE CONTENTupstream
Scientific platformThe source of every field statement. Medical affairs strategyDefining the role of the field team.2INSIGHT AND ENQUIRIESdownstream
KOL mapping and insightsStructuring field insight. Medical information and SRDsHandling routed enquiries.3THE WIDER PROGRAMMErelated services
Advisory boardsStructured expert input. Congress and symposium contentPresenting data at congresses.Request a Free Claim Traceability Check of Your Field Deck
It is better to identify a claim that first appears in a field deck, rather than in the platform, before anyone else finds it.