Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

Forum

  1. Home
  2. PAAB Q&A
  3. FYI post-approval change/preclearance exemption/what requires review/PAAB scope
  4. Formulary pieces
PAAB Notice
The responses, guidance, and advisories provided by the Pharmaceutical Advertising Advisory Board (PAAB), including but not limited to those available through the PAAB Forum, the PAAB website, and any PAAB correspondences, are specifically intended to assist individuals navigating the PAAB preclearance system. Repurposing or reproducing this content without written consent from the PAAB Commissioner is strictly prohibited. This prohibition includes, but is not limited to, use in machine learning or AI models.

Formulary pieces

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved FYI post-approval change/preclearance exemption/what requires review/PAAB scope
3 Posts 2 Posters 490 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • M Online
    M Online
    mef
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Hello, can you please provide clarity if a provincial formulary reimbursement form that was pre-filled with product name and coverage criteria only would be considered PAAB exempt? Thank you.

    palanskiP 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • M mef

      Hello, can you please provide clarity if a provincial formulary reimbursement form that was pre-filled with product name and coverage criteria only would be considered PAAB exempt? Thank you.

      palanskiP Offline
      palanskiP Offline
      palanski
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      @mef It definitely would not be.

      M 1 Reply Last reply
      1
      • palanskiP palanski

        @mef It definitely would not be.

        M Online
        M Online
        mef
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        @palanski @Jennifer-Carroll Thank you!

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        Reply
        • Reply as topic
        Log in to reply
        • Oldest to Newest
        • Newest to Oldest
        • Most Votes


        • Login

        • Don't have an account? Register

        • Login or register to search.
        • First post
          Last post
        0
        • Categories
        • Recent
        • Tags
        • Popular
        • Users
        • Groups