Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37709340›Full record

ReviewBMJ open2023

Looking at the fringes of MedTech innovation: a mapping review of horizon scanning and foresight methods.

Sonia Garcia Gonzalez-Moral, Fiona R Beyer, Anne O Oyewole, Catherine Richmond, Luke Wainwright, Dawn Craig

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Reporting the use of AI in horizon scanning: a brief communication on methodological standards.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Reporting Horizon Scanning Studies: Prototype Development Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. IOATLAS: scanning across the medical horizon.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Sonia Garcia Gonzalez-MoralNIHR Innovation Observatory at Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK sonia.garcia-gonzalez-moral@newcastle.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-0431-4771
Fiona R BeyerNIHR Innovation Observatory at Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Anne O OyewolePopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Catherine RichmondNIHR Innovation Observatory at Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Luke WainwrightPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3742-6411
Dawn CraigNIHR Innovation Observatory at Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

Funding

Department of Health HSRIC-2016-10009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesHorizon scanning (HS) is a method used to examine signs of change and may be used in foresight practice. HS methods used for the identification of innovative medicinal products cannot be applied in medical technologies (MedTech) due to differences in development and regulatory processes. The aim of this study is to identify HS and other methodologies used for MedTech foresight in support to healthcare decision-making.

methodA mapping review was performed. We searched bibliographical databases including MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore and Compendex Engineering Village and grey literature sources such as Google, CORE database and the International HTA database. Our searches identified 8888 records. After de-duplication, and manual and automated title, abstracts and full-text screening, 49 papers met the inclusion criteria and were data extracted.

resultsTwenty-five single different methods were identified, often used in combination; of these, only three were novel (appearing only once in the literature). Text mining or artificial intelligence solutions appear as early as 2012, often practised in patent and social media sources. The time horizon used in scanning was not often justified. Some studies regarded experts both as a source and as a method. Literature searching remains one of the most used methods for innovation identification. HS methods were vaguely reported, but often involved consulting with experts and stakeholders.

conclusionHeterogeneous methodologies, sources and time horizons are used for HS and foresight of MedTech innovation with little or no justification provided for their use. This review revealed an array of known methods being used in combination to overcome the limitations posed by single methods. The review also revealed inconsistency in methods reporting, with a lack of any consensus regarding best practice. Greater transparency in methods reporting and consistency in methods use would contribute to increased output quality to support informed timely decision-making.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceData MiningConsensusDatabases, BibliographicDatabases, FactualHumansBIOTECHNOLOGY & BIOINFORMATICSDecision MakingHealth policySystematic Review

Identifiers

PMID37709340
PMCPMC10503360

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.