HERON Evidence Review Options
A HERON Systematic Review:
A type of literature review focused on answering very specific study question(s). A systematic review can be used to provide a:
- Complete overview of data available to support Health Technology Assessment submissions
- Gap analysis activities
- Trial design (if conducted as part of Phase I/II activities)
- Content feed into model development
HERON distinguishes between the types of systematic reviews offered to address precise client need:
- Clinical systematic review of randomized control trial data
- Systematic review of economic evaluations
- Systematic review of health-related quality of life
- Systematic review of burden of disease
- Systematic review of patient-reported outcomes
- Systematic review of utility data
- Systematic review of cost and resource use data
- Systematic review of epidemiologic studies
A HERON Systematic Review will include ALL evidence which meets the inclusion criteria (designed to answer the specific study question[s]). A systematic review will ensure an objective and transparent approach for research identification and synthesis, minimizing bias.
HERON recommends systematic review if conducting quantitative analysis.
A HERON Literature Review:
A review of relevant studies/data/information to support an over-arching subject.
HERON literature reviews are often commissioned:
- As a pragmatic approach to understanding/determining the landscape
- To raise and maintain awareness of the landscape within a product or portfolio team
- As part of a communications plan
- To feed into model development
HERON distinguishes between the types of literature reviews offered to address precise client need. Options include:
- Literature review of epidemiologic studies
- Literature review of clinical data
- Literature review of cost and resource use
- Literature review of economic evaluations
- Literature review of health-related quality of life, burden of disease, and/or patient-reported outcomes
In contrast to the systematic review, the literature review focuses on the inclusion of studies that are relevant and excludes irrelevant studies even if they meet inclusion criteria.
HERON literature reviews offer clients a cost-effective alternative to full systematic reviews.
A HERON Disease Area Review:
A disease area review provides a complete overview of the disease including:
- Current management
- Clinical data
- Economic data
(Note: A disease area review includes a systematic review. This is not included in a landscape review.)
HERON disease area reviews are often commissioned to support:
- Submission development
- Overall strategy support
- Portfolio and product investment priorities
Disease area reviews can feed into Health Technology Assessment submissions, as they are developed, to be fully compliant.
HERON disease area reviews offer a hybrid of systematic review methodology within the context of a disease overview.
They are recommended for portfolio and product investment priorities, therapeutic/portfolio-based commercial decision-making, therapeutic-based thought leadership and brand marketing, and for Health Technology Assessment submissions in competitive landscapes.
A HERON Health Technology Assessment (HTA)/Guideline Review:
A review of clinical guidelines or HTA submissions in a particular therapeutic area
HERON HTA reviews are most typically used to support:
- Internal decision making on HTA strategy and positioning
- As a comparator and benchmark for non-HTA submissions
Supports HTA submission development as well as robust non-HTA submission.
HERON Communication Plans:
HERON medical writers specialize in translating evidence to articulate value. With global experience in stakeholder relations, HERON can support the strategic intent of your communications plans, as well as develop and deliver compelling content.
Includes the development of a manuscript, abstract, poster and oral presentation, and can be customized to include higher level thought leadership and stakeholder relations opportunities.
Supports product update and visibility. Can be used to gain market share based on influential thought leadership and affiliate positioning.
Highly useful in shaping global payer perceptions.