Selection of the 12 Most Disruptive Technologies
2019 | Artificial Intelligence Disruptive Dozen
The culture of innovation at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Massachusetts General Hospital fosters a good deal of discussion about emerging technologies and which ones will have the biggest impact. The passion of clinicians and researchers drives a continuous dialogue on what state-of-the-art medical technologies are just over the horizon and their potential to help patients. The Disruptive Dozen is a process that results in a rank ordered list of 12 AI-enabled technologies that leading PHS faculty feel will have the greatest impact on healthcare in the next few years.
2018 | Artificial Intelligence Disruptive Dozen
2017 | Cardiovascular Disruptive Dozen
2016 | Cancer Disruptive Dozen
Leading Harvard faculty from the Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Massachusetts General Hospital and Dana-Farber nominated the technologies that they believe will have the greatest impact on cancer care during the next decade. A rigorous process was used to choose the 12 technologies that represent their consensus on the one’s that will most influence care in the ten years. The technologies were featured as part of the World Medical Innovation Forum™, an annual collaborative innovation event held in Boston to examine the state of health care and innovation in a chosen medical discipline. The 2016 Forum, which took place April 25-27 focused on cancer.
2015 | Neuroscience Disruptive Dozen
The culture of innovation at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Massachusetts General Hospital, McLean Hospital and Spaulding Rehabilitation Network – throughout all of Partners HealthCare — naturally fosters a good deal of discussion about new “disruptive” technologies and which ones will have the biggest impact. The passion of Partners clinicians and researchers to provide the best care for patients drives a continuous dialogue on what state-of-the-art medical technologies are just over the horizon. The Disruptive Dozen was created to identify and rank the most disruptive technologies that Partners leading faculty feel will breakthrough over the next decade in neurological care.
12-15 leading Partners faculty gathered in February to form a committee of “selectors” to jointly choose and rank the final 12 technologies. The selection committee moderators were supported by Partners Innovation staff. To receive consideration for the final Disruptive Dozen, nominated technologies had to meet the following criteria:
The innovation had to have the strong potential for significant clinical impact at some point in the next decade and offer significant patient benefit in comparison to current practices. The innovation may also have had a significant benefit to the delivery/efficiency of the selected field.
Nominated field-related innovations had to have a high probability of successful commercial deployment—e.g., payers will be expected to support it.
The innovation must be on the market sometime before ten years from April. Ideally, the final group selected would involve a blend of disruptive technologies coming to market in the next three to four years as well as ones that will come to market later in the decade.
The initial pass of the 34 nominations by the selection committee eliminated all technologies that didn’t meet the criteria or didn’t have a realistic potential of being ranked in the top 15. The moderators named each technology and asked panel members to vote “yes” or “no” to move the technology to the next round. One “yes” vote is enough to advance the technology.
The moderators described the candidate technology, pointing out salient points, and then asked for comments from committee members. After a discussion of the pros and cons of the technology, panel members voted A, B, or C with a raise of the hand. Innovation staff recorded the voting.
A. It’s highly probable that the technology will significantly influence the selected field before ten years from April.
B. It’s probable that the technology will significantly influence the selected field before ten years from April.
C. It’s not likely that the technology will significantly influence the selected field before ten years from April.
Each surviving technology earned a score with overall rank tied to the size of the score—i.e., the higher the score, the better. Innovation staff reported this initial ranking of all technologies.
Final Scores and Announcement
Selection committee members jointly ranked the innovations from 1 to 12 using the initial scoring and further discussion. The selection committee ranking is final and is announced in a one-hour panel on the last day of the World Medical Innovation Forum. The session is moderated by the Forum Co-Chairs and features 12 faculty members selected to briefly comment on each technology.