Which association to join, and whether a second one earns its fee
Association choice depends on the work a writer does, the people they need to meet and the education or support they need. A national body, an international medical-writing association and a specialist society can serve different needs, so each additional membership has to offer something the writer values.
Selection criteria
Associations differ in size, activity and breadth of membership; writers should choose the association or associations that best meet their needs and participate actively. Useful criteria for comparing memberships include the following.
- Access to high-quality educational content and enjoyable programmes.
- Opportunities to earn credentials or awards.
- National and regional networking with colleagues.
- Ways to extend professional reach and connect with future employers.
One association may not provide everything a writer needs, and several memberships may help expand knowledge, networks and career opportunities. Specialist societies can complement a broad medical-writing association by supporting particular career niches. Geographic scope and specialist focus differ even among bodies that welcome international members: in 2023 the American and Australasian Medical Writers Associations, Chartered Institute of Editing and Proofreading and International Society for Medical Publication Professionals all welcomed members from anywhere.
Relevance can change with the writer’s work. One freelance joined the American Society of Journalists and Authors (ASJA) while writing for consumers; as her career changed, she found the membership less relevant but continued to value its visibility, writing discussions and all-freelance support network. Another member of both ASJA and the American Medical Writers Association (AMWA) found that meeting successful nonmedical writers helped her discover publications and new markets.
National and international scope
A national association can complement an international body with a local forum for professionalisation and country-specific knowledge. Writers can investigate forming a local association or join an existing one to meet people with similar questions and needs. In a spring 2012 survey of members of the Spanish Association of Medical Writers (AERTeM), most respondents found membership useful, with networking the most frequently cited reason to continue and further training another important factor. By 2023 AERTeM had 143 members from Spanish-speaking countries, mainly Spain; it was open to anyone, and 70% of members were freelance.
An association’s region need not be a legal jurisdiction: following the UK’s June 2016 vote to leave the EU, the European Medical Writers Association (EMWA) stated that membership remained open to writers in the UK and Switzerland and to writers outside Europe. For US-related work, AMWA can complement EMWA; advice from an EMWA webinar was to remain current on both sides of the Atlantic because differences depend on the document’s applicable regulations and the project.
Membership composition can shape conference networking. In 2015 a member of both associations estimated EMWA’s freelance share at no more than about 10% and felt that employment by competing pharmaceutical companies changed conference relationships compared with AMWA’s networking. He considered European conferences more expensive for freelances, but potentially useful for finding a pharmaceutical job or contractor.
For work-specific choices, the Board of Editors in the Life Sciences (BELS) can interest editors, ISMPP manuscript writers, and the Alliance for Continuing Education in the Health Professions continuing-medical-education writers; DIA and the Association of Health Care Journalists (AHCJ) are other options.
Editing, freelance writing and journal management
In 2007 the Council of Science Editors (CSE) brought together people across scientific publishing, including editors, publishers, authors, designers, production staff, XML specialists and information professionals. In 2007 about 15% of AMWA members also belonged to CSE. An editor and research administrator comparing societies in 2014 found CSE less useful for manuscript preparation than for journal management, while still valuing its shared concerns with ethics and authorship and contact with journal editors.
The International Society of Managing and Technical Editors (ISMTE) focuses on running journal editorial offices and managing peer review. In 2017 its conferences covered editorial-office practice, metrics, open access and publication ethics across North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific, with nonmembers welcome. Its monthly newsletter and developing resource library addressed author guidelines, figures, peer-review metrics and workflows. Delegates rated networking highly, since for some the conference was their only annual opportunity to meet people doing similar work.
ASJA’s constituency in 2009 was independent nonfiction writers across print, online and broadcast media. Its 2009 offer illustrated benefits beyond medical-writing education: confidential information about members’ rates and publisher experiences, access to health insurance and a press card, and a service distributing story ideas to more than 8,000 media contacts.
For one freelance editor and research administrator in 2014, AMWA and BELS generated the most freelance work because prospective clients searched their directories for credentialed writers. She also considered the Editorial Freelancers Association (EFA) worth exploring for its resources, directory, jobs and active chapters; its events then admitted nonmembers at a higher fee, allowing a trial before joining. A health-content writer’s 2018 experience differed: EFA’s mostly editing focus, low-paying one-off job listings and few meetings did not fit her work.
Publications and research administration
In 2008–2017, ISMPP brought together pharmaceutical, biotechnology and device companies, communication agencies, journals, academics, investigators and independent writers and editors. Its stated goals in that period included education and advocacy, integrity and transparency, and publication standards and best practices. In 2017 members at all experience levels could contribute through volunteer committees. Its 2011 offer combined an annual conference open to members and nonmembers, monthly educational webinars free to members, and online job postings, a listserve and news alerts. In 2014 an editor and research administrator valued its workshops and publications focus alongside AMWA.
The International Publication Planning Association (TIPPA) offered a different arrangement in 2011: free membership, volunteer board members and commercial sponsorship, with two annual conferences for discussing industry publications, ethics, journal views and guidelines. Although for-profit, it stated that it was not intended to generate revenue; its meetings prohibited advertising and commercial messages. It concentrated on forums for discussion rather than formal industry advocacy, and qualified website registrants could use a job bank, archive and message boards. One academic writer found its industry perspective useful when working with clinical-trial counterparts, despite few membership resources and meeting fees that could exceed $1,500 in 2014.
For grant work, the National Council of University Research Administrators (NCURA) focuses on grant rules and regulations, which can help writers understand sponsors’ needs. In 2014 a research administrator valued workshops and discussions with programme sponsors and officers for early insight into grant-announcement priorities, supported by listserves and weekly webinars. She also valued the National Organization of Research Development Professionals for its community of grant-development and research-office staff, active listserves with jobs and information, and calls convened around specific interests.
Drug development and regulatory affairs
In 2011–2015, DIA provided a multidisciplinary forum across drug and device discovery, development and lifecycle management, including industry, regulators, academia and contract services. Compared with a writers’ association’s focus on communication, its subject range extended to human resources, devices, pharmaceuticals, biostatistics, project and data management, and ethics. Writers interested in how drugs and devices are developed can use such exposure to expand their knowledge and professional contacts. A regulatory consultant valued interactions with FDA and EMA regulators and exhibitors at DIA meetings in 2011.
DIA’s large general conferences and smaller specialist meetings served different needs: in 2014 its roughly 7,000-person general conference could be overwhelming but offered access to potential employers, while the smaller Medical and Scientific Communications Annual Forum concentrated on communications, regulatory writing and publications. Its 2011 programme had major European and US meetings and more than 50 additional meetings worldwide, alongside online learning. The Regulatory Affairs Professionals Society (RAPS) in 2011 focused on regulatory professionals across pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical-device development, approval and marketing. It offered education, training, networking and professional development for people making strategic decisions using regulations and guidelines.
Communication skills and broader networks
A health-content and journalism writer in 2018 found the Society for Healthcare Strategy and Marketing Development and AHCJ useful for free resources and conferences, while the Healthcare Businesswomen’s Association’s pharmaceutical emphasis did not fit her work.
Technical-communication societies can offer skills that transfer across subject areas. In 2014 a medical writer with research-promotion and public-relations experience found the Society for Technical Communication’s (STC) meetings useful for document design, usability, accessibility, web development, information architecture and technology. About 10% of respondents to AMWA’s 2010 membership survey also belonged to STC. STC’s 2012 programme included geographic chapters, virtual specialist groups, webinars and online certificates, with procedure writing and documentation identified as relevant to pharmaceutical and medical-device writers.
The same writer’s 2014 comparison distinguished the Public Relations Society of America’s (PRSA) strategic-communication focus from the International Association of Business Communicators’ attention to wording in print and digital media. Both offered national and local networking, education, awards and guidance on interpersonal and leadership skills, with topics such as strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis, branding, communicating change and global collaboration. PRSA’s Health Academy offered a health-specific group with online discussions and an annual conference.
In her experience, the Association for Women in Communications and Healthcare Businesswomen’s Association offered broader professional networks and personal skill development. She met people in creative communication roles through AWC, while HBA included physicians, lawyers, pharmaceutical sales staff and hospital administrators.