From discovery to decision: How pharma and biotech teams can close the research access gap

Author: Sacha Billett

For pharma and biotech research and development (R&D) teams, access to scientific research now shapes the speed, accuracy, and direction of innovation.

To better understand how organisations are navigating these challenges, Springer Nature surveyed 300 pharma and biotech professionals across North America and Europe. The findings reveal that as research demand continues to accelerate, access pathways have struggled to keep pace, creating friction across workflows that depend on fast, reliable scientific insight.

Explore key insights from the report and how organisations are reducing research friction to move from discovery to decision-making with greater confidence.

Research access is under pressure from every direction

Scientific literature is now fully embedded in daily workflows, with survey data revealing that 81% of pharma and biotech professionals access scientific research weekly or daily. Yet, as research demands grow, access is being shaped by wider structural pressures rather than isolated issues.

The research shift from reference material to core infrastructure

Researchers now rely on scientific literature from experimental design and validation through to interpreting results. It also underpins regulatory and compliance documentation, where accurate evidence is essential for approvals and submissions.

Beyond the lab, research supports strategic R&D decisions and competitive intelligence, with researchers using published findings to:

• Track therapeutic progress
• Identify emerging opportunities 
• Understand market positioning

Research access now functions more like operational infrastructure than a discretionary resource, similar to cloud platforms or essential laboratory equipment.

Why fragmented discovery slows scientific progress

Despite this reliance, discovery remains fragmented. There is no single route to scientific content, with researchers moving between:

• Publisher platforms, such as Springer Nature Link 
• Open access (OA) repositories 
• Institutional library systems 
• General search engines, including Google Scholar and PubMed 
• Emerging AI tools  

This often creates repeated switching between systems, duplicated search effort, and uneven access experiences. For startups and cross-institutional teams, inconsistent subscription coverage adds further friction, turning discovery into a multi-step process rather than a seamless workflow.

Research demand is growing, but access inequality persists

Access also remains uneven. The Springer Nature survey reveals that while 65% of researchers highly value subscriptions, 26% report having no access, and only 12% rely on personal subscriptions. This reflects more than a pricing challenge. It highlights a wider organisational capability gap that most strongly affects:

• Startups
• Scaling biotech firms
• Smaller or distributed research teams

As a result, some of the environments driving the highest research demand continue to face the greatest access limitations.

What the data reveals about access, speed, and trust

Survey insights from pharma and biotech professionals reveal a few clear patterns:

1. Speed to knowledge is now a core R&D constraint

Limited access to literature can slow progress at multiple stages of the pipeline, including:

• Delaying patent filings 
• Weakening IP positioning 
• Reducing the ability to act early on emerging science 

It also affects clinical development. Delays in accessing key studies can slow trial design decisions and regulatory readiness. In competitive research environments, even small bottlenecks can affect commercial advantage.

2. Paywalls and fragmented access reduce productivity 

When researchers encounter paywalls or gaps in coverage, work rarely stops. Instead, time shifts toward:

• Tracking down alternative versions of papers
• Contacting colleagues
• Relying on informal sharing networks

These workarounds interrupt active research workflows, particularly during literature reviews and analysis phases. They can also increase compliance risk when content is accessed outside formal systems.  

3. Discovery fragmentation creates a “cognitive tax”

Fragmentation creates more than operational friction. It also increases cognitive load. Researchers move between multiple platforms, logins, and search tools, often repeating the same queries across different systems. 

They also spend time confirming whether sources are complete, current, and credible. This ongoing validation slows momentum and diverts high-value scientific time away from interpretation and experimentation. 

4. Trust in quality remains the anchor

Even as AI tools and open platforms become more common, trust remains the deciding factor. In fact, the survey found that 47% of researchers prioritise content quality above all other considerations. 

Peer-reviewed journals continue to be the most trusted source, particularly in regulated environments where accuracy matters. Researchers remain cautious about unverified outputs, especially when decisions affect clinical or regulatory outcomes — reinforcing the importance of trusted research ecosystems.

How organisations can close the research access gap

As research workflows grow more complex, pharma and biotech professionals can take a more strategic approach to research access by:

Reframing access as a performance lever

Faster access to trusted literature can help R&D teams:

• Make stronger decisions
• Minimise delays across development pipelines
• Respond more quickly to emerging scientific developments

This also changes how organisations evaluate ROI. The value extends beyond content access alone and includes reduced risk, faster validation, and improved research velocity. Organisations that align access strategy with pipeline goals and competitive priorities are often better positioned to maintain momentum in competitive markets.

Building scalable research foundations early

Fragmented access can quickly become a barrier for startups and growing biotech firms as teams expand. Establishing consistent, centralised access early helps create more stable research workflows and reduces reliance on disconnected sharing networks or informal access routes.

It also gives smaller organisations a stronger research capability from the start. In lean environments, efficient access can help teams compete more effectively alongside major players.

Reducing fragmentation and compliance risk

Consistency across global and cross-functional teams is increasingly important for larger pharmaceutical organisations. Standardised access pathways can reduce duplicated effort, support collaboration, and limit reliance on unofficial sharing channels.

Integrating research access into wider governance and compliance frameworks also strengthens operational resilience. Amid evolving regulatory expectations, trusted access systems are an essential aspect of research integrity and long-term efficiency.

Why hybrid access models are emerging as the practical standard

Open access repositories support broad discovery and accessibility. Researchers often rely on OA content during early-stage exploration, interdisciplinary scanning, and initial literature reviews. It helps teams engage with a wider scientific conversation and identify emerging developments more quickly.

Subscription-based access remains essential for deeper research and higher-stakes decision-making. In areas such as drug discovery, clinical development, and regulatory preparation, researchers depend on validated, peer-reviewed evidence and comprehensive journal coverage to support confident analysis and reduce risk.

Creating a more connected approach to research discovery

For corporate R&D teams, the focus is moving away from choosing one model over another. More effective workflows combine the reach of open access with the depth, consistency, and trust of subscription-based research.

As AI-enabled discovery tools continue to evolve, this balance is becoming even more important. Accelerated discovery here can support innovation, but trusted evidence remains central to compliance and research quality.

Closing the gap between discovery and decision-making

Fragmented systems and inconsistent access continue to slow progress at critical moments across the R&D lifecycle. Closing that gap requires more connected research environments built around efficient discovery workflows and reliable data foundations. This shift is essential for ensuring that faster discovery is matched by trusted, high-quality scientific evidence.

Read the full report to explore the survey findings and trends shaping the future of research access in pharma and biotech.

Related content

• IP for startups: Protecting innovation with patents & copyrights
• Reproducibility in R&D building trust and digital foundations — Expert perspectives (Part 1
• Transparency in R&D and reproducible research in practice — Expert perspectives (Part 2)
• How digital labs enhance reproducibility and accelerate innovation

Don't miss the latest news & blogs, subscribe to The Link Alerts!