By Gabriela Ramirez Guevara, Principal Consultant, HEOR, Health Tech Enterprise
Health tech innovators are natural problem-solvers. They see inefficiencies, unmet needs and opportunities for improvement, then set out to build something better. It is what drives innovation across our sector. But there is a common mistake many organisations make, particularly in the early stages of development.
They focus on proving that their solution works before they have fully demonstrated the scale of the problem it is designed to solve.
At first glance, this might seem counterintuitive. After all, surely the priority is to build a product, test it and generate results?
Not necessarily. The reality is that a successful health technology is not judged solely on its functionality. It is judged on whether it addresses a problem significant enough to warrant investment, implementation and long-term adoption. That distinction matters.
The NHS operates within a system of finite resources and competing priorities. Every investment decision requires a choice. Funding directed towards one initiative is funding that cannot be spent elsewhere. As a result, decision-makers are not simply asking whether a technology works. They are asking whether the problem it addresses is important enough to justify the cost of solving it. Too often, innovators arrive with compelling technology but limited evidence about the burden of the issue they are trying to tackle. They know the challenge exists. They may experience it first-hand. They may even have strong anecdotal evidence from clinicians or patients.
What they cannot always demonstrate is its true impact.
- How much does it cost the system?
- How many patients are affected?
- What is the operational burden on healthcare professionals?
- How much capacity is being lost?
- What are the long-term consequences of doing nothing?
Without answers to these questions, even the most promising innovation can struggle to gain traction. This is where health economics can play a critical role.
Before evaluating the value of a solution, we need to understand the value of solving the problem. That requires a clear picture of the current state. Not just the clinical impact, but the wider operational and financial consequences as well. For some technologies, the greatest benefit lies in improving patient outcomes. For others, the value comes from streamlining pathways, reducing delays or releasing capacity within an overstretched system.
Both are important. But neither can be properly assessed without first understanding the burden of the status quo. This is why I often encourage innovators to take a step back before rushing into pilots and evaluations.
The first question should not be, “How do we prove our technology works?” It should be, “How do we prove this problem is worth solving? Establishing that baseline changes everything.
It creates a clear benchmark against which future outcomes can be measured. It helps shape evidence-generation strategies. It strengthens conversations with investors, commissioners and procurement teams. Most importantly, it ensures that innovation is aligned with a challenge that the healthcare system itself recognises as a priority.
Where evidence is limited or fragmented, this process becomes even more important. Developing a structured Health Economics Analysis Plan (HEAP) can help organisations identify critical data gaps early, understand what evidence will be needed for future decision-making and avoid expensive detours later in the development journey.
In many cases, this work feels less exciting than building the technology itself. But it is often the difference between creating an interesting product and creating a solution that achieves widespread adoption.
Health tech is full of clever ideas. The organisations that stand out are the ones that can clearly demonstrate not only that their solution works, but that the problem they are addressing is substantial, measurable and costly enough to demand action. Because ultimately, the strongest case for innovation does not start with the technology. It starts with the problem.
Gabriela Ramirez Guevara, Principal Consultant, HEOR, Health Tech Enterprise
Gabriela is a Health Economist, with over a decade of experience spanning consulting, the pharmaceutical industry, and the NHS. Her expertise lies in real-world evidence, health technology assessment (HTA), and health economics and outcomes research (HEOR).
Throughout her career, Gabriela has led outcomes research and HTA projects, developing extensive expertise in both methodology and the practical application of evidence to support healthcare decision-making. She has successfully managed NICE and SMC submissions for clients and most recently served as Lead Health Economist within an NHS Health Economics Unit.
Passionate about using data and evidence to improve patient outcomes, Gabriela is committed to helping stakeholders demonstrate the value of new treatments and health interventions that address the challenges of disease and long-term health conditions.
