The varied views of neurological patient groups on the subject of pharma's corporate reputation, 2017 Patient groups specialising in neurological conditions hold diverse views about pharma's corporate reputation (and how the industry could improve)Embargoed publication date: Wednesday, 8th August 2018, 6am GMTPress release based on the results of a new report: 'The Corporate Reputation of Pharma, 2017—the Perspective of Neurological Patient Groups', 5th edition
27 companies analysed in this report: AbbVie I Acorda I Allergan I Almirall I Amgen I Astellas Pharma I AstraZeneca I Bayer I Biogen I Boehringer Ingelheim I Bristol-Myers Squibb I Celgene I Eisai I Eli Lilly I Grünenthal I GSK I Janssen I Lundbeck I Merck & Co/MSD I Merck KGaA I Novartis I Pfizer I Roche/Genentech I Sanofi I Takeda I Teva I and UCB. State of relationships between neurological patient groups and the pharmaceutical industry The 202 neurological patient groups worldwide responding to the 2017 survey on the ‘Corporate Reputation of the Pharmaceutical Industry’ were more positive about the industry’s corporate reputation than their predecessors in 2016. 42% of 2017's respondent neurological patient groups stated that the pharma industry as a whole had an “Excellent” or “Good” corporate reputation—ranking the industry 3rd for corporate reputation out of nine healthcare sectors (compared with the equivalent 2016 figure of 28%, which ranked pharma 5th out of eight healthcare sectors in 2016). One possible explanation for the industry’s rise in corporate reputation among neurological patient groups in 2017 could be that the levels, or the quality (or both), of industry partnerships with neurological patient groups increased that year. In 2017, 40% of the neurological patient groups described pharma as “Excellent” or “Good” at patient-group partnerships, compared with 28% in 2016.
Views of neurological patient groups varyThe one major theme running through this neurological analysis, however, is the significant diversity in attitude between the neurological patient organisations—according to their neurological specialty. The chart below shows the different perspectives of the various types of neurological patient groups on the overall corporate reputation of the pharma industry for each of PatientView's 12 indicators of corporate reputation.The varied views of patient groups on the 12 indicators of corporate reputation, 2017. The percentage of patient groups saying that the pharmaceutical industry was “Excellent” or “Good” at each indicator of corporate reputation. Colours in the table refer to each indicator (each column). Dark red is the lowest percentage, and represents the poorest performance at corporate reputation for the indicator, as reported by the specific catchment of respondent patient groups. Conversely, dark green represents the best performance.
The 12 indicators of corporate reputation, from the patient-group perspective The data show the following:
The purpose of considering 2017’s neurological Corporate-Reputation results in such detail is to highlight the fact that not all neurological patient groups hold similar views on pharmaceutical companies—and, therefore, not all of these patient groups have similar needs. How pharma could improve: comments from four very-different neurological patient groups ... Canadian local epilepsy patient group requesting more investment in research, and improvements in access to medicines.
Spanish regional multiple-sclerosis patient group commenting on the need for improved patient-group relationships, with the aim of improving communication between industry and patient groups.
UK national neurological patient group discussing Parkinson's disease and offering evidence that pharma could benefit from improving its understanding of patients' needs.
US national dementia patient group expressing frustration with slow progress being made in R&D.
So, how did the companies perform at corporate reputation in 2017, in the viewpoints of patient groups specialising in neurological conditions? Ranking at corporate reputation is measured by patient groups familiar with a company.
PROFILES OF THE 202 PATIENT GROUPS SPECIALISING IN NEUROLOGICAL CONDITIONS, AND PARTICIPATING IN THE 2017 STUDY Country headquarters of 2017’s 202 respondent neurological patient groups: Number Geographic remit of 2017's 202 neurological patient groups: Percentage FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THIS REPORT, PLEASE USE THE CONTACT DETAILS BELOW-End of press release-
|