Evaluating Metrics Applied to the Medical Science Liaison (MSL) Role: A Survey-Based Study of Canadian MSL Leaders

INTRODUCTION: Metrics utilized within the Medical Science Liaison (MSL) role are plentiful and traditionally quantitative. We sought to understand the current use and value of metrics applied to the MSL role, including the use of qualitative metrics. METHODS: We developed a list of 70 MSL leaders working in Canada, spanning 29 companies. Invitations were emailed Jun 16, 2020 and the 25-question online survey was open for 3 weeks. Questions were designed to assess demographics as well as how and why metrics are applied to the MSL role. Data analyses were descriptive. RESULTS: Responses were received from 44 leaders (63%). Of the 42 eligible, 45% had ≤ 2 years of experience as MSL leaders and 86% supported specialty care products over many phases of the product lifecycle. A majority (69%) agreed or strongly agreed that metrics are critical to understanding whether an MSL is delivering value, and 98% had used metrics in the past year. The most common reason to use metrics was ‘to show value/impact of MSLs to leadership’ (66%). The most frequently used metric was ‘number of health-care professional (HCP) interactions’, despite this being seen as having moderate value. Quantitative metrics were used more often than qualitative, although qualitative were more often highly valued. CONCLUSION: The data collected show a lack of agreement between the frequency of use for some metrics and their value in demonstrating the contribution of an MSL. Overall, MSL leaders in our study felt qualitative metrics were a better means of showing the true impact of MSLs. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43441-021-00291-y.