CredenceResearch Logo

Medical technology assessment

Test whether a new medical technology can move from promising data to routine use

A technology can perform well in studies and still fail to win adoption if it does not fit clinical workflow, lacks reimbursement or costs more than the value buyers recognize. Credence Research assesses emerging medical technologies against these tests, so investors, acquirers and R&D teams can decide what to fund, license or develop.

Discuss your technology assessmentSee what the outputs include

Five tests a new technology must pass, and where evidence is usually thinnest

1Technical performanceReal-world performance
2Clinical evidenceEvidence payers accept
3Economic valueTotal cost of ownership
4Workflow fitStaff and time impact
5Access pathwayCoverage timing

Marked items usually need expert input, buyer interviews or economic modeling beyond published studies.

What is a medical technology assessment?

In this service, a medical technology assessment evaluates the commercial prospects of a device, diagnostic or digital health technology. It examines clinical and economic value, how the technology fits into care delivery, the path to regulatory clearance and payment, and the alternatives it must displace. It is a market assessment, not a formal health technology assessment submitted to a payer.

Decisions that bring teams to a technology assessment

These decisions usually come before large investments in development, trials or acquisition.

Investing in a medtech company

You need an independent view of whether a startup's technology can achieve adoption.

Licensing or acquiring a technology

You need to compare a target technology against current practice and competing approaches.

Prioritizing R&D programs

Several technologies compete for development budget.

Choosing a first clinical application

A platform technology could serve several specialties, and you need to pick where to start.

Planning evidence generation

You need to know which clinical and economic evidence buyers and payers will require.

Start with what you already know

Most teams have technical data, early clinical results and a view of the unmet need. What usually remains uncertain is how clinicians and buyers compare the technology with current practice, what it costs to adopt in real settings and whether payment exists.

Questions a technology assessment can investigate

Clinical value

  • What problem does the technology solve better than current options?
  • How strong is the evidence compared with what adopters expect?
  • Which patient groups benefit most?

Economic value

  • What does adoption cost, including training, maintenance and consumables?
  • What savings or revenue could offset those costs?
  • Who in the provider organization captures the benefit?

Adoption

  • How does the technology change clinical workflow?
  • Which specialties and care settings are likely early adopters?
  • What would stop adoption after a successful pilot?

Competition and access

  • Which competing technologies target the same need?
  • What regulatory pathway and timeline are likely?
  • Is existing reimbursement available, or would new coverage be needed?

What published sources can tell you, and what needs further validation

Company filings, investor presentations, clinical publications, regulatory databases and licensing announcements describe much of the technology landscape. They rarely show how buyers weigh a new technology against current practice.

Where desk research is often sufficient, and where decisions usually need more evidence
TopicDesk research can often establishWhat often remains unresolvedHow it can be tested
Technical performancePublished specifications and study resultsPerformance outside controlled studiesClinical expert interviews
Clinical evidencePublished trialsWhether evidence meets adopter and payer thresholdsInterviews with clinicians and reimbursement experts
Cost of adoptionDevice prices where publishedTotal cost including training, maintenance and workflow changeCost modeling checked with hospital staff
Competing technologiesAnnounced products and pipelinesActual traction of competitorsExpert interviews and adoption signals
ReimbursementPublished codes and coverage policiesLikely coverage for a new technologyReimbursement landscape review

AI tools can speed up reviews of clinical literature, filings and patents across a technology area. Judging whether evidence is strong enough to change practice requires clinical expertise and direct input from adopters.

How evidence gaps translate into research

This example is illustrative. It shows how a study could be designed and does not describe a specific client engagement.

Wearable cardiac monitoring technology

Illustrative example
Business question
An investor is evaluating a startup developing a wearable heart rhythm monitor.
Evidence gap
Published results are promising, but it is unclear how cardiologists compare it with existing monitors, whether reimbursement covers it and how data review fits clinic workflow.
Research method
Clinical expert interviews, reimbursement review and a comparison against competing monitoring options.
Deliverable
A technology scorecard across clinical, economic, workflow and access criteria, with open questions for due diligence.
Decision supported
Whether to invest and which milestones to require.

Our research approach

We combine published evidence with input from people who would use, buy or pay for the technology.

Methods, what they are used for and their limits
MethodPurposeLimitation
Literature, filings and patent reviewEstablish performance claims, evidence and competing approachesPublished data may not reflect real-world use
Clinical expert interviewsTest clinical value and workflow fitIndividual views vary; several sources are needed
Buyer and reimbursement interviewsUnderstand purchase criteria and payment prospectsCannot predict specific coverage decisions
Economic modelingEstimate total cost of adoption and offsetting valueSensitive to assumptions
Competitive landscape analysisCompare alternative technologiesLimited to verifiable information

We do not seek confidential information from competitors, and we do not present interview opinions as audited data.

What you receive

Deliverables depend on scope, and not every study includes every output. We agree on outputs during scoping.

  • Technology scorecard

    The technology rated on clinical, economic, workflow and access criteria, with the evidence behind each rating.

    Use it to compare technologies on a consistent basis.

  • Competitive landscape

    Alternative technologies and current practice, with evidence dates.

    Use it to understand what the technology must displace.

  • Adoption cost and value model

    Costs and benefits for a typical adopting site, with ranges.

    Use it to shape pricing and the value message.

  • Evidence gap summary

    Clinical and economic evidence adopters and payers are likely to require.

    Use it to plan trials and studies.

  • Assessment memo

    Findings, risks and open questions, with observed facts and estimates labeled separately.

    Use it to support an investment, licensing or R&D decision.

Published report or custom research?

Published medical device market reports can describe overall market size and major players in a technology area. A technology assessment is more useful when the decision depends on how one specific technology compares with alternatives in practice. Technology areas we assess include diagnostics and IVD, orthopedics, medical imaging, implants, wound care, infusion, emergency medicine, respiratory care, patient monitoring, surgery and endoscopy, and telemedicine.

Is a technology assessment right for your decision?

  • You are deciding whether to invest in, license or develop a specific technology.
  • Published data does not show how it compares with current practice.
  • The decision depends on adoption, cost or reimbursement assumptions.
  • You have a decision date, such as an investment committee or portfolio review.

If most of these apply, a scoping conversation is likely to be productive. If not, a published report or a short discussion about scope may be a better first step.

Discuss your technology assessment

Frequently asked questions

Discuss your technology assessment

Tell us about the technology and the decision you are working on.

What happens next

A member of our research team reviews your brief and contacts you to discuss scope and approach. If existing research can answer your question, we will point you to it.

Phone