首页> 外文学位 >Technical communication and the development of a Request for Designation (RFD) submission to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
【24h】

Technical communication and the development of a Request for Designation (RFD) submission to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

机译:技术交流和向美国食品药品管理局(FDA)提交的指定要求(RFD)的开发。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

In this dissertation, I use autoethnography to retrospectively examine the development of a document submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Specifically, I retrospectively examine my perceptions of the corporate history and corporate culture surrounding the development of the biotech product, how the history and culture influenced the company's development of a Request For Designation (RFD) FDA submission, and how the RFD affected subsequent events in the company.;RFDs are a relatively new type of FDA submission designed specifically for a newly added division within the FDA---the Office of Combination Products (OCP)---formed to evaluate combination products. Combination products are biotech products not easily classified as being solely a biologic, device, or drug. The OCP reviews a combination product's RFD to assess if a biotech product achieves its primary mode of action (PMOA) through physical (device), chemical (drug), or organic (biologic) means. The purpose of the RFD is to persuade the OCP reviewer to classify the product as per the sponsor's preferred recommendation---assuming the sponsor can build a sufficiently viable argument supporting the sponsor's recommended PMOA. The OCP's determination of PMOA directly affects the development time and expense involved in obtaining clearance from the FDA to market a new biotech product.;Although a maximum of only 15-pages in length, an RFD can determine the fate of a new biotech product or the company sponsoring the product. Considering the critical nature of an RFD, it seems natural that hiring a technical communicator to assist in the development of a persuasive-yet-factual RFD should be paramount to a biotech company. However, there is currently little or no discussion of the roles technical communicators play in the development of RFDs and other FDA submissions.;By documenting my experiences and observations, it is my intent to objectively share my discoveries and thoughts on developing an RFD (and tangentially other FDA submissions) with other technical communicators so as to provide insight into this new area of exploration within the discipline.
机译:在本文中,我使用人种志技术回顾性地审查了提交给美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)的文档的开发情况。具体而言,我回顾了我对围绕生物技术产品开发的公司历史和公司文化的看法,历史和文化如何影响公司向FDA提交的指定要求(RFD)申报的发展,以及RFD如何影响以后的事件。 RFD是一种相对较新的FDA呈件,专门为FDA内部新成立的部门(组合产品办公室(OCP))设计,用于评估组合产品。组合产品是不容易归类为仅生物制品,设备或药物的生物技术产品。 OCP审查组合产品的RFD,以评估生物技术产品是否通过物理(设备),化学(药物)或有机(生物)手段达到其主要作用模式(PMOA)。 RFD的目的是说服OCP审阅者根据赞助者的推荐建议对产品进行分类-假设赞助者可以建立足够可行的论点来支持赞助者的推荐PMOA。 OCP对PMOA的确定直接影响到开发时间和从FDA获得许可以销售新的生物技术产品所涉及的费用。尽管最多只有15页,RFD可以确定新生物技术产品的命运或赞助产品的公司。考虑到RFD的关键性质,似乎很自然的是,聘请技术传播者来协助开发具有说服力的事实RFD对于生物技术公司而言至关重要。但是,目前很少或几乎没有讨论技术交流员在RFD和其他FDA申报书的开发中所起的作用。;通过记录我的经验和观察,我的目的是客观地分享我在开发RFD方面的发现和想法(以及切向其他FDA呈交文件)与其他技术交流者,以便对该学科内这一新的探索领域提供见识。

著录项

  • 作者

    Bodary, Michael J.;

  • 作者单位

    The University of Memphis.;

  • 授予单位 The University of Memphis.;
  • 学科 Technical communication.;Management.;Public administration.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2011
  • 页码 415 p.
  • 总页数 415
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号