Measuring the Impact of Medical Science Liaisons: A Global Cross-Sectional Survey of Evaluation Practices and Perceptions

Introduction: Medical science liaisons (MSLs) serve a critical role in pharmaceutical, biotechnology, medical device, diagnostics, and healthcare companies by facilitating scientific exchange with key opinion leaders (KOLs) and health care professionals (HCPs). Despite their growing strategic importance, evaluating MSL impact remains challenging due to the complexity of their responsibilities. This study investigates current practices for assessing MSL impact, explores how their value is defined, and examines the challenges in measuring MSL performance. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted, targeting MSLs, MSL managers/directors, MSL Excellence and Operations, executive management, and other medical affairs professionals. Participants were recruited via professional networks, social media, pharmaceutical industry conferences, online platforms dedicated to medical affairs, and posting on LinkedIn, resulting in a non-probability convenience sample. The survey comprised multiple-choice and Likert-scale questions covering KOL engagement impact scores, definitions of MSL value and impact, and challenges in performance, measurement, and assessment. Results: A total of 1023 respondents participated. Geographically, the majority of respondents were based in the United States (56%), followed by Spain (6%), Brazil (5%), and Canada (5%), with additional contributions from Europe, Latin America, and other regions. Overall, 52% indicated that KOL engagement impact scores should be utilized as a performance metric. MSL value was most often defined as building and maintaining strong KOL relationships (27%), whereas MSL impact was most frequently linked to influencing clinical practice and improving patient care (46%). Key challenges included difficulty defining and measuring the quality of MSL activities (76%) and reliance on quantitative standards that do not reflect MSLs' value (61%). Only 40% reported that their organizations measure MSL impact, and 41% suggested that the assessment should combine individual achievements with team contributions. Furthermore, 67% considered measuring MSL performance "difficult" or "very difficult". Conclusion: This study highlights the challenges of measuring MSLs' impact and value. Many organizations continue to struggle with capturing the quality of MSL activities and their broader strategic contributions.