Key opinion leaders shape practice through their research, their teaching, their role in writing guidelines, and their influence on colleagues. They are usually identified by their publications, their roles as trial investigators, their presentations at major congresses, their positions in professional societies and their contributions to treatment guidelines.
Companies often distinguish between national or international experts, whose influence spans a whole field, and regional experts, who shape practice in their own institutions and networks. More recently, many also recognize people whose influence comes mainly from online channels.
The term itself has fallen out of favor in many companies, partly because it can suggest that experts are valued for their influence over others rather than for their expertise. “External expert,” “scientific expert” or “thought leader” are common alternatives.
Engagement with experts in Medical Affairs is usually led by medical science liaisons and takes the form of scientific exchange, advisory boards and research collaboration. In the United States, payments and other transfers of value from manufacturers to physicians and teaching hospitals are reported publicly through the Open Payments program, so engagement plans need to account for transparency rules.
Keeping a current picture of each expert’s work, rather than a profile written once and left alone, is one of the most practical jobs in medical intelligence.