One of the most common myths among early-stage innovators—especially in medtech—is the belief that validating a market means spending thousands of dollars on market research reports. Many founders assume that a glossy, high-priced market study is the ultimate proof of business opportunity. But here’s the good news: you don’t need a $10,000 report to get meaningful, actionable market insights. In fact, the best validation strategies often come from much more accessible—and far less expensive—sources.
At Medventions, we help our aspiring innovators learn how to cut through the noise, ask the right questions, and uncover real-world insight that data alone can’t deliver. We emphasize that market validation isn’t just about size; it’s about fit, need, timing, and relevance. The real challenge isn’t finding information; it’s knowing where to look, what to ask, and how to listen.
Here are some of the key strategies we teach our fellows: practical, proven approaches to help you validate your idea without draining your budget.
Cast a wide net, then go deeper
First, let’s talk about the approach. When beginning your market research journey, it’s important to think in layers. Start by collecting broad contextual information that frames the overall healthcare environment in which your innovation would exist. Public sources like national census data, trade associations, and government publications provide essential demographic, procedural, and economic context. These can help you understand population size, aging trends, healthcare access, and more, all of which heavily influence healthcare markets.
From there, more specialized resources can offer sharper insight. ClinicalTrials.gov, for instance, is a powerful tool to explore ongoing research and technology development in your space. Financial disclosure platforms such as SEDAR (for Canadian companies) or EDGAR (in the U.S.) offer deep dives into financials, investor reports, MD&As, strategic priorities, and risk disclosures from public med-tech firms. Government health registries and organizations like the CDC, CIHI, or CDA-AMC can provide valuable datasets on health service usage, cost, and disease burden.
And don’t overlook the FDA’s MAUDE database—a goldmine of real-world reports on device malfunctions and adverse events. It’s one of the best sources for understanding what’s going wrong with current technologies and where unmet needs truly exist.
Tools like ChatGPT can be quite useful for supporting your market research. While it’s not a replacement for peer-reviewed data or firsthand discovery, it can be incredibly useful for accelerating your process, particularly in the early stages. From brainstorming interview questions to summarizing academic papers, mapping the competitive landscape, or organizing your insights, ChatGPT can act like a flexible research assistant. Just remember: it’s a tool to guide your thinking, not a substitute for real-world validation.
Talk to real people
While secondary data is important, one of the most effective—and overlooked—strategies is simply talking to the people who live with the problem every day. This kind of grassroots, interview-based discovery can be game-changing.
Conversations with clinicians, surgeons, nurses, procurement professionals, and even sales reps from medtech companies can give you an unfiltered view of unmet needs, workflow inefficiencies, and technology adoption barriers. Ask them where current solutions fall short, what they wish they had, and what’s changing in their practice. You’ll not only uncover rich qualitative data but may also be pointed toward additional resources and metrics you hadn’t considered.
In many cases, a few meaningful conversations can offer more depth and nuance than 100 pages of a static market report.
Don’t overlook high-quality public data
There’s a treasure trove of public data available; you just have to know where to look. Organizations like the American Heart Association, WHO, and various national and provincial health agencies regularly publish reports filled with relevant, often disease-specific statistics. These can include procedure volumes, trends in disease burden, cost analyses, and more.
Academic databases like PubMed and Google Scholar offer access to peer-reviewed research and clinical findings that can highlight emerging technologies, gaps in care, and real-world outcomes. They also give you insight into benchmark technologies and clinical standards, which can help position your solution within a competitive or regulatory framework.
Surprisingly, even accounting and consulting firms like Deloitte, EY, and PwC are strong sources of insight. They release free annual or semi-annual “state of the industry” reports that outline key trends, emerging business models, and investment patterns in the life sciences and health tech sectors.
When (and how) to consider buying third-party market reports
While we have been emphasizing scrappy, low-cost ways to validate your market early on, there may come a time when investing in a third-party market report is worth considering, particularly as your idea matures or you begin engaging investors, partners or strategic buyers. That said, buying a report shouldn’t be treated as a shortcut. These reports vary widely in quality, relevance, and depth. Some innovators find them helpful; others walk away feeling they paid thousands for information they already knew. So how do you decide?
First, ask around. There’s a high degree of variability in these reports; some are thoroughly researched and packed with useful insights, while others are auto-generated, generic, or outdated. Recommendations from peers, advisors, or incubator networks can help steer you toward providers with a good track record.
It’s also worth knowing that many of these marketing research firms are eager to make incremental sales—and that gives you room to negotiate. Startups can often access discounts, and report providers may even be interested in working with you as an expert contributor in the future. Don’t be afraid to ask about pricing flexibility or partnership opportunities.
Before committing, always request a sample, such as a table of contents or selected chapters. A good report should include detailed geographic breakdowns, temporal market trends, thoughtful expert commentary, and a clear view of the competitive landscape. If it doesn’t, it might not be worth the cost.
You might also explore whether any grants or funding programs can offset the expense. Some accelerators or economic development agencies offer support for market intelligence resources. It’s also worth remembering that potential commercial partners such as distributors, hospitals, or manufacturers may already have data on volumes, pricing, or market demand. If they’re willing to share it with you, that insight can be even more targeted and reliable than a formal report.
Finally, if you do go ahead and purchase a high-quality report and realize it taught you very little, don’t be discouraged. That’s often a sign you’re already deeply informed in your space and now you have third-party data to reinforce your message to investors, collaborators, and stakeholders.
Still, be sure to put that data to work: Use what you learn to inform your financial model, and make sure your projections include a base case, a realistic scenario, and an upside version, each grounded in actual market dynamics.
Buying a report isn’t wrong. It just shouldn’t be your first move—or your only one.
Follow the money–and the companies in your innovation space
Another powerful way to validate your market is by watching how public companies behave. Listen to their quarterly earnings calls. Read their annual reports. Pay attention to what they’re emphasizing to investors. Are they entering new markets? Flagging regulatory risks? Investing in new categories of devices? All of these are valuable clues. Studying a handful of players in your space, even if they’re not direct competitors, can help you benchmark your idea, understand commercialization pathways, and anticipate potential pitfalls.Lead with curiosity, not just numbers
A common temptation in early market research is to jump straight to the big question: “How big is this market?”
While that’s a critical question, it’s not the best starting point. Before calculating the total addressable market (TAM), it’s essential to understand the nuances of the problem you’re solving. That said, market size does matter, especially when it comes to aligning effort with opportunity. If your solution requires substantial R&D, regulatory approval, and commercialization efforts, the problem you’re tackling needs to be big enough to justify that investment. A $1B+ market is a helpful benchmark, but at minimum, make sure the scale of the opportunity matches the scope of resources it will take to address it. If you’re aiming high, the market needs to have high potential too.
Begin by asking:
– Who experiences this problem?
– How are they solving it today?
– What’s not working?
– Who are the decision makers and payers?
– What would make someone switch to a new solution?
By grounding your research in these practical questions, you’ll be better positioned to assess the real market opportunity—not just a theoretical TAM. Remember: good research isn’t about proving a point; it’s about discovering one. When you lead with curiosity, the market tends to reveal more than any report ever could.
At Medventions, we believe that the best innovations in health care start with a deep understanding of the problem, the system, and the people affected. That’s why our approach goes beyond theory. We teach our fellows to think like entrepreneurs, ask like researchers, and listen like clinicians.
Market validation isn’t a box to check; it’s a mindset. And when innovators are equipped to ask the right questions and seek the right context, they’re better prepared to build technologies that truly matter.
Innovation is hard. But with the right training and tools, it doesn’t have to be a shot in the dark.
Some of the ideas in this article were inspired by the insights shared during Medventions training sessions. Thank you to Dr. Brian Courtney and Nick Kuryluk for their thought-provoking lectures on market research and healthcare innovation. Their perspectives continue to shape how our fellows and students approach early-stage validation.
