Eugean Jiwanmall
Lead Research Analyst for Medical Policy & Health Technology Evaluation Independence Blue Cross Family of Companies & Independence Health Group
Eugean Jiwanmall’s past professional experiences include basic & advanced sciences and clinical research. In his current role as a Lead Research Analyst for Medical Policy & Technology Evaluation at Independence Blue Cross’ Medical & Claim Payment Policy Department within Facilitated Health Networks and Medical Affairs, he has served as the subject-matter-expert, writer, reviewer, communicator, presenter, consultant, adviser/facilitator, and decision-maker for hundreds of medical policy topics and technology assessments within dozens of clinical disciplines and multiple business areas. Eugean has led & participated in numerous roles & capacities in a number of conferences, summits, and other national & international events etc. upon invitations. He has been invited by renowned organizations, evaluator bodies, & thinktanks etc. to be key informant, KOL, & renowned expert & faculty on a variety of complex and challenging topics, and recognized in print & media communications & publications for these works. Eugean has and continues to serve on multiple leading advisory boards, executive leadership councils, and panels per invitations. Due to his manifold expertise & diverse experiences, Eugean has been invited to advise & provide knowledges and inputs to grants, (including those for National Institutes of Health (NIH)), & he continues to serve as one of the premier drivers in many evolving & emerging fields within life sciences and medical & clinical practices. His mission & roles have allowed him to make valuable contributions towards these efforts in all facets from developing R&D frameworks to detailing evidentiary requirements, among other achievements, across the spectrum of clinical needs & medical spaces.
Eugean has taken and completed graduate coursework in bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine. He holds a bachelor’s degree in biological sciences with honors from Drexel University (minor was in business administration), a master’s degree of public health in evaluative clinical sciences from Dartmouth Medical School, and an MBA in healthcare management and economics with honors from Drexel University.
Seminars
Many RWE strategies fail long before formal payer or HTA review – due to poor framing, mis‑sequencing, unclear research questions, and false assumptions about what counts as ‘decision-relevant evidence’. This roundtable helps attendees stress‑test their evidence strategies against real access expectations.
Networking Discussion Questions:
- At what point in your organization does RWE most often become misaligned with payer or HTA decision needs – and why?
- How are teams distinguishing between evidence that is ‘interesting’, ‘publishable’ and ‘payable’?
- What are the most common misconceptions stakeholders still have about what payers and HTA bodies will accept from RWE and AI‑enabled studies?
- If you were forced to cut half of your current RWE or HEOR activity, what would you keep because it truly influences access decisions?
- Understanding why best practice RWE guidance does not guarantee acceptance in practice
- Identifying sources of subjectivity and uncertainty in HTA committee decision making
- Designing RWE strategies that improve predictability across markets and bodies
