The Social Media Tightrope

Rob: For medical publication professionals, social media may not always seem like an obvious part of a publication plan. But many health care providers are already using social media to find medical news, learn about studies, and discover publications. So how should we think about these platforms? How can social media fit into a publication plan, and how can teams use it effectively while navigating compliance and internal stakeholders?

This is In Plain Cite, a podcast exploring the biggest questions and trends facing medical publication and communication professionals. I'm your host, Rob Matheis, President and CEO of ISMPP.

Today I'm joined by Katie Veleta, the Senior Scientific Director  at Fingerpaint Medical, and Amelia Stymacks, their Senior Manager of Digital Strategy.

We'll explore why social media matters for publication professionals, how it can be integrated into publication planning, which channels and metrics to consider, and how teams can get started while building the right internal processes and guardrails.

Let's get into it.

[End of Intro]

Rob: Well, thank you guys for joining us for a discussion today on social media. I thought we might just start right from the top and ask why is social media important for publication professionals? Is it even relevant to our field and our profession moving forward?

Amelia: So we get that question a lot, but social media is really very important for your publication’s plans. HCPs are on social. We look at a lot of data, both survey data and behavioral data. And we know at least 56% of HCPs are using social media. That's both your personal networks like LinkedIn and YouTube, as well as those professional networks like Doximity and Ceremo.

So that's where they are, and the raw engagement data shows that HCPs are really interested in receiving medical news on these channels.

Katie: I think to add to that, I would also say, you know, what the data shows us is that they are on the channels, but the type of information they're also seeking there are, up-to-date information on and safety data, breaking medical news. So all things that are related to what kind of content would go into a publication plan.

They are also heavily relying on social media for information about congresses and congress presence, which we do know also plays into that publication planning process as well.

Rob: Right. So don't they read the journals anymore? I mean, what's the social media thing all about?

Amelia: They do, but you know, social media helps them get there and find it more easily. It's a good way to provide, like, a snippet of information and sort of tease to the larger pub

Rob: Okay, so you said a snippet of information. So are they getting the full journal article from the social media, or do they really still need to read the actual paper itself?

Amelia: Still need to read the actual paper. There are a lot of issues with compliance when it comes to pubs on social. You often can't share the actual results right in that post. You can only discuss the study itself and what it looked at.

Katie: Yeah. So what we see consistently across the landscape is publication posts that report the efficacy outcomes. So like what were we measuring, what were the primary endpoints, without actually going into what the data was. 

But even just that little bit of information can really prime the HCP of like, "Oh, this is an endpoint that's important to me or my patients. I do want to read further. Let me go a little bit further." 

Rob: Yeah, that was my next question, is: are the social media outlets really from a publication planning perspective really just designed to get people to actually read the papers as opposed to trying to summarize the papers? Like how is it actually being used in real life?

Katie: I think there's a couple of different facets to this question. So, how is it really being utilized? Amelia and my team, for one of our poster presentations at the 2026 ISMPP presentation, we looked at this question pretty specifically.

We really wanted to understand: how are current medical affairs teams, which are generally the ones who are driving – or at least involved in – publication planning, how are they utilizing social media to begin with, and where do publications fit in. 

And so we analyzed about a thousand posts over a six-month timeframe. We bucketed them into different categories. So we bucketed them into disease state education, publications, congress-related content, and other. 

And what we saw that is really relevant for this audience and relevant to that question, is that there's a lower volume of posts related to discussing publications in the whole landscape in and of itself.

And that may have to do with some of the compliance reasons that Amelia spoke to earlier. But what this really signals to us is that it's an opportunity. We know that HCPs are going to these platforms looking for this kind of information based on this indicated data and additional research. 

And then our research at ISMPP kind of showed the other side of it, which is they're going there, but then the folks who are responsible for disseminating this information aren't actually putting a lot of it out there.

Rob: So there's definitely a gap it sounds like and maybe even opportunity for medical affairs teams to do a better job of thinking about social media and how that can be part of the larger publication plan is what I hear you saying.

Katie: Exactly. 

Rob: If I'm a publication professional and I'm thinking about wanting to get into using social media as a method to create awareness around my publications, am I going to like a medical account? Am I using an author's account? Am I using the corporate account from a pharmaceutical company? Like, where am I going to try to get started with this?

Amelia: I mean, it's dependent. We have been seeing a lot of medical accounts popping up, and we do-- we, we like that. You know, there's a big difference between what a corporate account versus a medical account can do. 

While a corporate account has to appeal to this large audience that goes beyond HCPs and might include, you know, patients and stakeholders, a medical account can get more specific. The tone is more academic and peer-to-peer. You can really appeal to your specific audience. 

So, yes, authors should be sharing their own publications on their pages. Corporate accounts should share them. But these medical accounts are, I think, where there's the best opportunity for distribution.

Katie: Yeah, and I'll just add to that and say we have seen different tactics dependent on size of company, leadership buy-in, et cetera.

I think we have a lot of folks coming to us, asking these questions and wanting these one size fits all, what's my channel? What do I do? Where do I start? 

But in the same way that we need to be precise in what we're discussing and disseminating to HCPs, we also need to be precise in where we start within the internal organizations. Because the stakeholders are going to be different, and the needs are going to be different.

Rob: Now, if I'm working in an organization and I'm trying to work with my internal stakeholders around using social media, is there a particular sell that I should be using? Like, if I have a resistant medical affairs department or corporate affairs or whatever it may be, like, what should I be saying to my stakeholders if I'm alone in my company and not really getting any traction?

Amelia: I mean, it starts with, like, trying to make your case with data, really. So we have helped a lot of teams build that case for the creation of a channel or for green-lighting a new type of content on their channel. 

Looking at the competitive landscape to show that what you're proposing isn't completely out of left field, that there is a precedent for sharing publications or sharing data like this on social media. 

Showing all that information that, you know, HCPs are responding, that it's reaching the intended audience, and that there are lots and lots of guardrails that can be put in place.

Katie: And I think the only other thing that I would add, related to rallying your internal stakeholders, hopefully you're not on an island by yourself. We have seen folks spearhead this, and maintain it themselves, and it's a really lonely island, right? 

So I think the idea is, find your one champion in whatever department, and put your heads together and really think about building that use case. How does it add value to the organization? How does it ultimately ladder up to your key communication objectives, to your overall strategy for your medical affairs team? 

You’ve really got to build that use case into the overall strategy for the organization as well, so that you can show the value to the leadership and start to bring people on board.

Rob: So that's a really important point. You say show the value to leadership. Are there different metrics we should be looking at and considering? Like, what do you recommend to our listeners who are thinking, "Okay, I really want to do this. I want to show some value"? What types of metrics can we bring to our leadership in the future?

Amelia: Beyond the pure audience size numbers, being able to show, look at all of these hundreds of thousands of HCPs that are active on the channel, looking at, specifically the types of content that you want to be sharing, and then showing how competitors have driven X amount of engagement.

You know, we can see engagements, we can see clicks. And that ultimately gives you a sense of how many people you've actually driven to the publication. 

Katie: Yeah, I think, Amelia, that's a really great point, there's sort of these two different, potential measurements, right? There's those metrics that we get, which are like clicks and engagements, which really tell us, okay, people are interacting with this. But then there's the other level of, how are HCPs, how is the community talking about this data and this information?

And I think that's where a lot of the value lies. And we're seeing specifically on LinkedIn that there are a lot of deeper, more content-driven conversations happening on this platform than, say, for example, were happening on Twitter or X, right? That was very, very rapid fire. And folks, when they're using this platform, are really thinking about what they want to communicate.

There are often multiple paragraphs that then their colleagues and HCPs are coming in and engaging with as well. So there is really a lot of value in that particularly.

Rob: Yeah, would you say the sentiment analysis is more important than things like pure clicks at this point in time?

Amelia: I wouldn't say one is more important than the other. It's really going to be dependent on what your objectives are when you're starting out. But I do think it's important to layer in that listening analysis. I think a lot of companies don't do that, and that's, a really good opportunity to see beyond the numbers that, you see in your typical report.

Katie: Yeah, and then to add to that, those numbers, as much as our relationship with them is a little bit contentious at times, they exist for a reason, right? So they do let us know if at some level a targeting strategy is working or people are engaging with the content, and that's definitely that first step and that first layer. And then to Amelia's point, that sentiment analysis is essential to layer on top of it to add meaning to what's happening.

Rob: I guess they're both very important, and definitely for our listeners, having these metrics and having numbers, and things of that nature to try to support, return on investment and things like that is, it really translates to budget for the future. So it's, really, really important.

So if I'm thinking about dabbling again, or if I'm thinking about getting into using social media, are there certain therapeutic areas that are more relevant for this type of tactic or is it really across the board?

Katie: So this gets back into our poster data a little bit as well. So, when we did that original analysis, we bucketed about 1,000 posts by, post types so congress, publication, disease state, education, and other. 

But we also were really interested in looking at what therapeutic areas are represented and where there might be some gaps.

And we did this analysis, and essentially we compared total post volume to average engagement, to see if there are high-volume TAs that are driving low engagement or low-volume TAs that are driving high engagement.

Amelia: This just showed us, you know, if there were any areas that were, really oversaturated, which is going to be usually, like, your oncology, or if there were any areas that were underserved. 

And ultimately, we did find that there were a handful of therapeutic areas where their posts were driving really high engagements, but they didn't meet that threshold that we would consider average or above average volume.

Katie: Yeah. And so those TAs that we identified in this poster were ENT, rare diseases, gynecology, infectious diseases and vaccines, and hepatology. So rare disease is definitely of special interest. I know those HCPs are often hard to single out beyond like, patient advocacy, outreach and stuff like that. 

They're often hard to single out. And so we're seeing this as an opportunity on LinkedIn and a place that might be of interest for folks who are publishing in that space.

Rob: So across all therapeutic areas, if I'm thinking about moving into social media, is including social media part of the future publication planning process? Like, should it be part of a gap analysis? Should it be part of, one of our columns on our, traditional publication plans at this point?

Like, how should we be thinking about this to really integrate it? Yes. The answer is yes. Go ahead, talk more about that.

Katie: Yeah, sorry, I'm very biased to this. As somebody who came up as a medical writer, and has participated in publication planning, I think in the same way that we're considering publication extenders like plain language summaries and all these other pieces that accompany data, we also need to be thinking about how can those pieces be utilized beyond just their initial creation?

Can those be leveraged on social media? You really need to be thinking about the downstream impact of your data from the very beginning, so not just what tier publication am I going for or what impact factor am I going for, what kind of journal am I going for, but beyond that, how can I have a broad reach with this?

And it's not something that you have to consider for every single publication, it can be something that you prioritize for high value, publications to the organization, pivotal data, things of that nature is a good place to start.

Rob: So Katie, you get me right into the next part of this conversation from my perspective, which is the compliance, right, and the ethical perspective. 

So you've mentioned a couple times now important data, pivotal data. How do I know as a publication professional which data, which publications should be part of a social media plan that goes out into the real world? And if I'm doing that, how do I avoid the criticism of not cherry-picking?

Katie: It's a very tricky fine line. I'll let Amelia, comment on some of those pieces

Amelia: Cherry picking is definitely an issue. We work with a lot of teams that are required to post every single publication. So it's like a balance of effort. If you're going to put out every single publication, they don't all have to be a really high lift.

You can just get them out there. And then for your higher priority pieces, looking for ways to be a little more creative, to make the post itself a little meatier, maybe include the author in the post, things like that.

Katie: And I definitely, back to your previous question, I just want to underline and kind of reiterate, in terms of thinking about, supporting pivotal data, I was speaking to that as a starting point of, like, how do you get started and where can you pilot something and how can that be something that you show a return on investment for.

But definitely to Amelia's point, there has to be some caution taken. And in our experience, the creation of these posts, they go through MLR review. The MLR reviewers are more than happy to bring this point up to help you along the way to say, "Hey, if we're doing this or we're talking about this, we also need to make sure we're talking about this."

So it kind of underscores the point that we're talking about this in terms of the publications teams maybe spearheading it, but it is truly a group effort,

Rob: right. So then do we include negative trials as part of our social media presence, or is that something where if it's a negative trial, it doesn't belong in the publication plan? I'm trying to figure out, and I'm actually trying to take the perspective of our listeners who may be thinking, "Okay, I want to implement this, but I know I've got a legal person. I know I got a compliance person that's going to give me pushback." How do we manage that?

Amelia: It's so dependent on the reviewers. I've worked with teams that do have to post every negative finding and publication, and I've worked with teams that don't. It's such a case by case basis.

Rob: Yeah, I'd imagine it is case by case, and I'm sure different companies have different policies and they have different approaches for it. And so it's, it's probably best to advise our listeners to really work with their teams internally to figure out what their process and their policy is going to be, moving forward.

Katie: Definitely. And I think that underscores a, point, related to how do you get started and, what are the best ways to use this channel, is that when you are getting started, you should be working with those internal teams to get, a social media policy in place, that has all of these things outlined as a resource for you, the rest of your internal team, so that these questions come up in the beginning, but then they're answered as you go along the process.

Rob: So having a social media policy I think sounds very, very important. Do you see this as the role of the publication professional to spearhead this, or is it a different area of medical affairs? Like where do you see it landing?

Katie: Yeah, that's a great question. I think it goes back to this point we were making earlier about it really depends on the organization. So the size of the organization will probably dictate who this falls to. 

In our current experience, I would say that it is oftentimes a separate team from the publication team who works very closely in tandem with them because you have to be coordinating. You have to know, okay, we do have this data at this conference, and it, you know, it is going to read out here instead of three months later at a different congress. 

So oftentimes what we're seeing is it falls to maybe like a SciComm team who is working in tandem with publications, but think it is organization-dependent.

Amelia: Yeah, because rarely is an account posting exclusively pubs and data. A lot of times there's going to be disease state education and clinical trials. And so whoever's running the account is usually more central and works closely, like Katie said, with all those other teams

Rob: Yeah, and I think that makes good sense, right? I mean, it shouldn't be just publication centric. I think it adds to the credibility if you have a robust account that's producing a lot of different content, then it can help to fit in better there.

So one area that we didn't cover and I wanted to ask you about is there's a– I don't want to say it's a new terminology because it's not new anymore at all– but is the digital opinion leader, the DOLs.

Does that fall into this sphere of talking about social media? And, you know, should publication professionals be aware of DOLs, and is there a certain responsibility they have for managing that in the social media space?

Katie: I feel like we would need a whole podcast for that.

Rob: We can certainly do that.

Amelia: Katie, you're more enmeshed in that than I am. Do you want to speak to that?

Katie: Okay, so I'll try to tackle this in kind of, two separate, buckets. So, traditionally we're thinking of KOLs, key opinion leaders. These are the folks who are, you know, at those top-tier research institutions. They're supporting the work, they're authoring the publications. That– that's what we're kind of used to in past times, right?

And as you were saying, now with the uptick of all these social media platforms, we have DOLs, which sometimes can be a KOL and sometimes are not classified as KOLs. They could be folks who are medical residents or some other healthcare professional, like an oncology nurse or a physician assistant who are very involved in the care of patients and interested in the data, but not necessarily authoring publications or running clinical trials.

So I do think that both are valuable and it's important to kind of zoom out and look at the whole landscape of KOLs versus DOLs. What is one group communicating? And is it congruent with what this other group is communicating? And it kind of gets back to our information about sentiment analysis as well.

Like, ultimately, we want to have a full awareness of how the data lands and the potential impact it has on patient care. And so I think you have to take into consideration both KOL and DOL with the, awareness that there may - be some overlap, but there also may be some outliers.

Rob: Right. Very, very helpful. That's going to be a ‘to be continued’ for another podcast to continue on the DOLs because I think we could cover quite a bit of territory. 

So Amelia, Katie, to our listeners out there who are doing nothing at all with social media today, one piece of bolded advice for them.

Katie: I think what comes to mind for me is, like start with what you have and the stakeholders you know. So think of the seat that you're sitting in now, which, you know, we're all doing in our nine-to-five jobs, maybe even beyond that. But think of the seat that you're sitting in now, the TA you're rooted in, the team you're rooted in.

And then consider a potential pilot that involves the folks who are in proximity to you. So it could be your TA for oncology or something else. But really starting with what you have and the stakeholders you know I think is kind of a way to make it seem slightly less overwhelming.

Amelia: I would say familiarize yourself with the landscape. Understand the platform and the best practices before you jump into making your plans. I'm often surprised by how many folks don't have social accounts of their own or they aren't, monitoring the competitors out there, and I think that's really the best place to start.

That'll give you ideas for what other people are doing and what you want to do differently, and, give you a sense of what is and isn't working.

Rob: Definitely very, very good advice. Thank you both for that.

___

Rob: That's all for today. Thank you all for listening. Please take a minute to subscribe to In Plain Cite on your favorite podcast app. Share with your colleagues and rate our show highly if you liked what you heard today.

(Credits)

In Plain Cite is a production of ISMPP, the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals. 

Our production partner is CitizenRacecar. Our producer and editor is Hajar Eldaas. Post production by Alex Brouwer. Publication and promotion by Candice Chantalou.

To join ISMPP today, go to ismpp.org. Becoming a member means you can participate in value packed webinars and receive instant access to exclusive tools and resources. If you're interested, just go to ismpp.org, that's ISMPP.org, to learn more.