The specific platforms — websites, portals, tools — behind the services listed elsewhere on this site.
Where the rest of this site describes services, this section describes outcomes: the actual pharmaceutical digital platform a company ends up with, from an HCP portal to a vaccine finder tool, each with its own architecture, access model and content structure.
See HCP portal for how verification rigour is matched to what the content actually requires, rather than one standard applied everywhere.
Product catalogues and distributor portals reflect your ERP directly, not a manually maintained copy that drifts.
A product website and a disease awareness website operate under genuinely different rules — each build here starts from that distinction.
See patient portal and patient support programme website for how consent, plain-language content and data handling are treated as build requirements from the first wireframe, not a compliance pass applied at the end.
See investor relations website and pipeline page for how disclosure requirements and clinical-stage detail are presented without either overstating a result or burying it in caveats.
Every platform type we deliver, from websites and portals to tools and internal systems.
The services list describes disciplines — design, development, content, integrations. This page describes the actual platform you end up with once those services are combined for a specific purpose, such as an HCP portal or a distributor portal. Most engagements start from a platform type here and only later map back to which services build it.
Yes, and most projects do combine several platform types into one build. A professional portal, a product website and a medical information intake, for example, often ship together as a single coherent site rather than as separate disconnected properties. We scope the combination once we know which platforms your project needs.
Anything patient-facing or making a product claim — disease awareness, patient support programmes and the adverse event reporting form typically need the longest review cycle, since real people and real health claims are directly involved; internal platforms like an employee intranet usually need the least, because no patient-facing content sits inside them.
Yes — most of these platforms are built to read from and write back to systems you already have in place, such as Veeva, Salesforce, SAP and equivalent tools, rather than becoming yet another disconnected system your team has to maintain by hand outside those existing workflows.
It varies significantly by platform type and access complexity — an HCP portal requiring professional verification takes considerably longer than a straightforward corporate website. We scope the real timeline only once we know which specific platform you need and exactly what it has to do for your users.
Usually yes, provided the growth path is planned for from the start rather than bolted on afterward. See digital product strategy for how we scope architecture, data models and access control with future expansion in mind. A distributor portal built to later add ordering, for instance, needs that possibility designed in from day one, not retrofitted.
Tell us what you need and we will tell you how we would approach it.