Women's Health Horizons London 2026: Stop admiring the problem

On 22 September 2026, clinicians, founders, investors and policymakers gathered at the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) for the Women’s Health Horizons (WHH) London Autumn Summit. RCOG President Alison Wright opened the day by describing an opportunity to “reset the system” and build healthcare around women. 

Across discussions on prevention, diagnostics, investment, regulation, intellectual property and care delivery, one conclusion emerged repeatedly: scientific and technological innovation in women’s health is essential, but it is not enough. Real progress depends on healthcare systems adopting new solutions, businesses securing the funding and commercial pathways needed to scale them and stakeholders collaborating across traditional boundaries. 

1. Innovation is not enough: adoption is the real test

   Nobody at RCOG was short of ideas. What the women’s health sector struggles with is getting good ideas into the healthcare system.

   Giles Tully of PinPoint Data Science brought the point to life. PinPoint uses artificial intelligence (AI) to analyse blood-test markers and help triage patients with suspected cancer. Yet one NHS roll-out stalled because of information technology and staffing challenges, while grant funding continued to run down. The technology may be clever, but it still has to fit into real clinics, real budgets and real workflows.

   A good product needs clinical evidence and regulatory approval/compliance, but it may also need interoperable systems, trained staff, reimbursement, procurement support and capacity elsewhere in the pathway. 

   However, the policy environment is starting to catch up: the renewed Women’s Health Strategy introduced a £1.5 million FemTech challenge fund aimed at accelerating the adoption of new technologies. For innovators, however, the lesson is to plan for implementation, including IT integration, workforce requirements and procurement, as carefully as for the product development itself.

2. Commercialisation and investment: the best product does not always win

   Rock Health founder Halle Tecco argued that “the best product does not always win – distribution does”. Her point was that even highly effective innovations can struggle if they cannot reach the patients who need them. Whereas, more commercially sophisticated competitors often achieve greater impact because they have stronger routes to market.

   That theme was echoed throughout the day in discussions on investment strategies. For example, Priya Oberoi (GG Ventures), Sapna Shah (Sie Ventures) and Thang Vo-Ta (Calla Lily) all stressed that investors are looking for more than good science. They want to understand who will pay for a product, how it will be adopted and whether it can scale beyond a single pilot programme. A compelling clinical story is important, but commercial execution remains critical.

   The session ultimately offered a useful reminder for founders across the sector: innovation creates opportunity, but commercialisation creates impact. The most successful businesses are unlikely to be those with the most sophisticated technology alone. They will be the ones that can combine innovation with distribution, adoption and sustainable routes to market. Investors will be looking for companies with strong commercial leads, alongside innovators and scientists.

   Another pertinent point Halle Tecco raised is that the women’s health market is consistently underestimated because investors size it by reference to historic spending. That spending reflects decades of underdiagnosis and undertreatment, rather than the true scale of the opportunity. It is also a useful warning for AI developers: models trained on historic data can inherit the same blind spots. 

3. Collaboration, data and the intellectual property balance

   The Nordic Women’s Health Charter 2040 offered a system-level example of how collaboration might work. Julia Persson (Scita Health), Dr Aura Pyykönen (Isla) and Shireen Sindi (Karolinska Institute) described a framework linking research, care, innovation and awareness, supported by people, investment, policy and data. Their central proposition was not that every institution should build new infrastructure, but that existing strengths should be connected more effectively. 

   Sacha Nathan of GAiA Health echoed that message, making the case for pre-competitive collaboration on trusted patient information. He highlighted that shared standards, transparent governance and reusable resources may reduce duplication and allow organisations to direct more effort towards delivery. 

   For life sciences and health technology businesses, collaboration does not mean abandoning intellectual property. It means deciding deliberately what should be protected, licensed, shared or standardised. A carefully structured consortium or collaboration can preserve each participant’s core technology while creating joint evidence, common infrastructure or interoperable standards that none could deliver alone. The legal framework should support that balance through clear governance, data-access rules, publication processes and licensing arrangements. 

4. Regulatory approval is a milestone, not the destination

   The regulation and commercialisation panel, featuring Dr Lisa Campbell (Richmond Pharmacology), Laura Corcoran (Dignity Care) and Denise Calder (Think Precision Healthcare), captured another of the day’s central messages: regulatory approval does not guarantee adoption, but it can open doors and build trust with healthcare providers and patients. 

   Regulatory strategy should be developed alongside the product, not shortly before launch. Failing to follow the correct regulatory pathway can cause major delays launching products. For example, early decisions about intended purpose, claims and evidence can shape the development programme and determine whether a product falls within the medical device framework or remains a wellness product. For digital health and FemTech businesses, apparently small changes to product wording or functionality can alter the regulatory analysis. Therefore, companies must continue to consider regulatory strategy throughout the lifecycle of their products. 

   These issues should also be reflected in transaction and collaboration documents. Development agreements, clinical trial arrangements, data licences and commercial partnerships need clear provisions on regulatory responsibility, ownership of foreground and background intellectual property, rights to data and improvements, liability, publication and exit. Addressing these points early can prevent uncertainty from slowing a promising collaboration later. 

5. Prevention and earlier diagnosis: moving women’s health upstream

   Another recurring theme was the need to move women’s health upstream: from reacting to illness towards prevention, earlier diagnosis and appropriate intervention. Nicola Aspinall (London Gynaecology), Dr Claire Phipps (GP & Menopause Specialist) and Shikha Kapur (Consultant Gynaecologist) described a more proactive model of medicine, combining routine check-ups, informed choice, virtual access, wearables and one-stop multidisciplinary care. 

   That model depends on more than deploying new tools. Earlier diagnosis can improve outcomes and reduce pressure later in the pathway, but it can also expose existing bottlenecks. Identifying more patients is useful only if the system can confirm diagnoses, offer treatment and provide follow-up support. Prevention therefore requires investment in pathways and capacity, not just products. 

   AI could support that shift by helping healthcare providers identify risk, triage patients and use scarce resources more effectively. However, its value will depend on the quality and representativeness of the underlying data, as well as transparency, cybersecurity, accountability and appropriate clinical oversight. Those safeguards are particularly important in women’s health, where historic underrepresentation in research can be carried into the datasets used to develop and validate new tools. 

   The thread connecting these points is adoption. Prevention and earlier diagnosis will deliver real benefits only where the technology, evidence, workforce and downstream services are designed as a coherent pathway. Otherwise, innovation risks moving the bottleneck rather than removing it.

Women’s Health and Bristows

The mood at RCOG was optimistic, but impatient. The science and the ambition are there; what’s needed now is delivery. As Professor Dame Lesley Regan, Women’s Health Ambassador for England, put it: it’s time to “stop admiring the problem”.

For innovators, that means developing regulatory, evidence, reimbursement, intellectual property and implementation plans alongside the product. For investors and healthcare systems, it means recognising that historic underinvestment is not evidence of limited need. For the ecosystem as a whole, it means collaborating early enough to turn good ideas into care that women can actually access.

At Bristows, we advise innovators, investors and life sciences and technology companies on the regulatory, intellectual property, data and commercial questions involved in bringing women’s health solutions to market. We look forward to continuing the conversation. 

Keep engaged with Bristows’ women’s health and innovation activities by signing up for updates here.