OBJECTIVES:  To define the added value that digital technology can bring to health and social care by its ability to improve diagnosis via biosensors; enabling physicians, patients and carers to access information online, share experiences and identify treatment options. To assess the extent to which payers would pay for wearable technology to improve health and social care. To identify conflicting interests between stakeholders. METHODS:  Primary research was conducted with payers (n=100), using an online survey across EU5 to collect insight at national and regional levels from payers and physicians. A review of studies including workshops and interview programmes carried out by GfK in this area gives additional qualitative insight. RESULTS:  Seven key issues were identified: 1) Data ownership/analysis, 2) technology integration into disease management process, 3) limitations of moving from “simple monitoring” (information) to “intervention” to “prediction”, 4) “value” measurement and assessment, 5) who are the payers for such technology? 6) payers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for “value”, 7) what are the reasons for difference in WTP for pharmaceuticals that deliver similar value? Previous studies have shown that payers will only pay for products for which there is evidence of meaningful and measurable value. Payers consider that manufacturers’ should invest in generating this evidence, the likely nature of which is real world data translated to real world evidence. CONCLUSIONS:  The seven key areas that have been identified when considering the payers’ WTP for novel digital technology highlights the need for further evidence to be generated to support payment by “traditional” payers. There is likely conflict between “traditional” payers and manufacturers regarding data and evidence requirements and the return on investment that is seen from spend on data development. Further research is needed to review a shift in payment for digital technologies from the “traditional” payers to new payers including the patient.