JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Digital health companies increasingly depend on scientific evidence to raise capital, secure contracts, and stand out in a crowded market, yet little has been written about how science is practiced inside these companies. In 2023 and 2024, I described the role of the industry scientist and the barriers organizations face in integrating science, drawing on experience as head of science at a single company. This viewpoint revisits those claims from a different position: leading a science consultancy that has partnered with, advised, or held discovery conversations with more than 300 digital health and wellness companies. Three earlier claims endure. Science contributes to revenue when it answers questions buyers ask, resource-efficient methods such as retrospective analyses remain the right entry point, and science succeeds when business leaders own its use. Others require revision. Not every company needs a full-time scientific executive, hiring a scientist does not by itself produce a scientific strategy, and for artificial intelligence tools that make clinical claims, the runway before prospective trials become necessary has shortened. Working across many companies also revealed patterns no single role could show. Companies rarely ask for the science they need, evidence must align with business timelines without sacrificing rigor, and some of the most valuable scientific work involves shaping claims, measurement, and product decisions rather than conducting a study. I close with implications for scientists, company leaders, investors, payers and academic training programs, and a call for formal study of how science creates value in industry.