What To Know About Evaluating Evidence Behind Digital Health Solutions

As employers continue to invest in digital health solutions — from mental health apps and chronic condition management programs to virtual care platforms — HR and benefits leaders face an increasingly important question: How can they determine whether a digital health product actually delivers on its promises?

The answer begins with a careful evaluation of the evidence supporting a product's claims. Not all digital health solutions are backed by the same level of scientific validation, and understanding the difference can help HR teams make more informed benefits decisions, maximize employee value, and avoid investing in programs that lack proven outcomes.

Start with the Product’s Claims

The strength of evidence required should align with the nature of the product's claims. Some digital health vendors focus on operational benefits such as workflow improvements, employee engagement, or administrative efficiencies. Others make more specific health-related claims, such as reducing blood pressure, improving A1c levels for individuals with diabetes, or decreasing symptoms of anxiety or depression.

The more specific and clinically oriented the claim, the stronger the evidence should be. For example, if a digital health product claims to improve measurable clinical outcomes, HR teams should look for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), considered the gold standard for demonstrating effectiveness. Real-world performance data and observational studies can also provide valuable support, particularly when they demonstrate results across large and diverse populations.

Evaluating the Quality of Evidence

When reviewing vendor claims, HR leaders should look beyond headline outcomes and examine how the evidence was generated. High-quality evidence is typically characterized by:

• Proven and transparent research methodologies
• Adequate sample sizes
• Validated measurement tools
• Clearly defined outcomes
• Reproducible results

For example, a vendor claiming to reduce healthcare costs or utilization should be able to show how those outcomes were measured and whether the results were statistically significant. Evidence should demonstrate meaningful improvements rather than relying solely on user satisfaction surveys or engagement metrics.

Transparency is equally important. Employers should seek documentation explaining study design, participant demographics, comparison groups, and limitations. These details help determine whether reported outcomes are credible and applicable to a workforce population.

Credibility Matters in Digital Health

In the rapidly expanding digital health market, credibility has become a critical differentiator.

Building credibility begins with rigorous scientific validation of a product's health claims. Vendors must do more than simply market their solutions; they must demonstrate through evidence that their products achieve the outcomes they promise.

Consider a mental health application that claims to reduce anxiety symptoms. If the company can provide evidence from well-designed studies showing statistically significant reductions in anxiety among users, it moves beyond being a wellness tool and becomes a clinically supported solution. This distinction can be particularly important for employers seeking meaningful improvements in employee well-being and productivity.

Look for Independent Validation

Beyond vendor-sponsored studies, HR teams should look for independent forms of validation.

Peer-reviewed research helps ensure that findings have been evaluated by experts in the field. Alignment with recognized regulatory and evidence-based frameworks can further strengthen confidence in a product's effectiveness.

Several organizations provide valuable guidance in this area:

• The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) offers guidance and oversight for certain categories of digital health technologies and software-based medical devices.
• The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom has developed an Evidence Standards Framework (ESF) that outlines expectations for demonstrating the effectiveness and value of digital health technologies.
• The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) and the Peterson Health Technology Institute (PHTI) have developed frameworks designed to establish evidence standards for evaluating the clinical and economic value of digital health technologies.

These frameworks help employers understand whether a digital health solution has been assessed using recognized standards rather than solely relying on vendor-generated claims.

Why Evidence Standards Matter for Employers

Robust evidence benefits every stakeholder in the healthcare ecosystem, including employees, employers, health plans, and healthcare providers. Strong evidence increases confidence that a solution can improve outcomes, support workforce well-being, and potentially reduce healthcare costs.

NICE has emphasized that digital health technologies are evolving rapidly and that evidence standards are necessary to ensure these innovations are clinically effective and provide value to health and care systems. Similarly, ICER and PHTI have highlighted the importance of comprehensive and explicit evidence standards to help stakeholders understand the true value of digital health products and assess them consistently.

For HR teams, these standards provide a practical framework for evaluating an increasingly crowded marketplace. Rather than focusing on marketing claims alone, employers can assess whether a solution has meaningful, credible, and consistent evidence demonstrating that it works.

The Bottom Line

As digital health solutions become a larger component of employee benefits strategies, HR leaders must take an evidence-based approach to vendor evaluation. The strongest digital health products are those supported by rigorous research, transparent methodologies, validated outcomes, peer-reviewed studies, and alignment with recognized regulatory and evidence frameworks.

Ultimately, credible evidence does more than support a vendor's marketing claims — it helps employers invest confidently in solutions that can deliver measurable value for employees and the organization alike.

David G. Epstein, MHL, SHRM-SCP, is the director of human resources and talent strategy for Mobilization for Justice in New York City.