HEALTHCARE
Anticipating the reaction
before it hits.
Hospitals, laboratories, health authorities, insurers: test your clinical, communication and organizational decisions on coherent populations of patients, caregivers and citizens, before implementation.
THE THESIS — CARDINAL PROMISE
A healthcare decision is never purely medical. It is received, understood, contested, applied, or not, by populations that do not react the way clinical studies predict.
Our system lets you test that reception before you commit your credibility or your resources.
CASE STUDY — NATIONAL HEALTH AUTHORITY
“ How do you revive MMR vaccination coverage in lagging regions without triggering national polarization? ”
Simulated on 2.4 million parents of children aged 12-24 months · 18 typologies of vaccine hesitancy identified · 34 communication formats tested
Three regions are experiencing a continuous decline in MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) coverage: coverage fell from 91% to 76% over five years, below the herd-immunity threshold. The cause is multiple: post-COVID vaccine hesitancy, distrust of health authorities, a changing relationship to parenthood.
The authority must decide: a firm national campaign, a targeted regional campaign, or an approach through primary-care physicians? With what message? Without reawakening the anti-vaccine movements waiting for the slightest spark.
What the system revealed
The rejection is not ideological, it is experiential.
Contrary to the dominant narrative, only 8% of hesitant parents are convinced anti-vaxxers. 74% have experienced degraded care (a missed appointment, insufficient listening, contradictory information) which they project onto vaccination. The message must address this experience, not the ideological debate.
A firm national campaign worsens the situation in 4 of 12 regions.
In already polarized regions, a firm national statement triggers a Streisand effect: coverage drops a further 3 to 7 points. What works at the national level works exactly the opposite way in high-distrust regions. A uniform plan is counterproductive.
Primary-care physicians are the only cross-cutting channel.
The only messenger who gets a favorable hearing across all 18 typologies of hesitant parents is the primary-care physician. Not authorities, not celebrities, not expert scientists. A strategy that equips primary-care physicians with adapted dialogue tools achieves +23 points of coverage in 18 months.
What Imagine All The People did that no one else could have done
Our system individually interviewed 4,800 synthetic parents spread across the 18 identified hesitancy typologies, tested 34 communication formats (spots, posters, physician letters, interview dialogues), and projected effects over 24 months in each region. The “primary-care physicians + dialogue kit” strategy proved dominant in 11 of 12 regions.
No quantitative research institute can test 34 formats on 4,800 distinct profiles. No qualitative panel can project over 24 months. No AI persona tool can differentiate 18 typologies with this granularity.
- PROJECTED VACCINATION COVERAGE
- 76% → 89%at 18 months with recommended strategy
- NATIONAL POLARIZATION RISK
- −67%
- COST OF A MISTARGETED CAMPAIGN
- +EUR 12Mto return to 91% if the strategy is unsuitable
APPLICATIONS
Three uses for the healthcare sector.
Health communication & prevention
Test prevention messages, screening campaigns, health announcements before release. Identify segments that adhere, those that resist, and the pivot levers to avoid polarization.
Anticipating exceptional events
Model population behavior in the event of a pandemic, heatwave, food contamination, or climate event. Test crisis-management scenarios before they occur, calibrate mobilization messages.
Acceptability of care & adherence
Anticipate the reception of a new protocol, an innovative treatment, a change in access to care. Understand therapeutic adherence friction by patient segment, before deployment.
METHODS
Three ways to test a decision.
Comparing what a synthetic-population simulation brings against existing methods.
| AI PERSONAS | TRADITIONAL SURVEYS | IMAGINE ALL THE PEOPLE |
|---|---|---|
| SCALE | ||
| 5 to 10 fixed personas | 500 to 2,000 respondents | Up to 10 million coherent individuals |
| DYNAMICS | ||
| Frozen characteristics | Pre-written questions, static answers | Agents that ask, probe and brainstorm |
| TIME HORIZON | ||
| Assumed current state | Snapshot of the present | Projection of future consequences |
| DEPTH | ||
| One synthetic answer | Aggregated statistical tables | Individual dialogue + collective analysis |
| DATA & SOVEREIGNTY | ||
| Limited demographic data · US public cloud | Personal data collected at scale · Public cloud | Zero personal data · Infrastructure in France · On-premise possible |
OTHER CASES
Three other decisions tested in the sector.
LABORATORY — DRUG LAUNCH
“How do you launch a new hypertension treatment without it being perceived as ‘one more pill’?”
Simulated on 1.8 million hypertensive patients treated for > 3 years · 22 profiles of relationship to medication
The rejection is not about efficacy: patients trust their doctor. The rejection is about fatigue: adding a treatment means acknowledging that previous ones failed. Repositioning it as “simplification” rather than “addition” transforms how it is read.
- “ONE MORE PILL” SENTIMENT
- 71% → 24%
- PHYSICIAN ADHERENCE INTENT
- +38 pts
HOSPITAL — PROTOCOL CHANGE
“How do you roll out a new emergency-care protocol without triggering resistance from care teams?”
6 rollout scenarios tested · 31 dynamic follow-ups on resistance points identified in real time
Caregiver resistance is not about the protocol: it is about the rollout pace. An 8-week rollout triggers blockages. A 6-month rollout with peer-led training (not management-led) achieves adherence without degrading interim quality.
- CAREGIVER ADHERENCE
- 34% → 78%
- TIME TO STABLE QUALITY
- halved
AUTHORITY — PANDEMIC SCENARIO
“Anticipating population behavior in the face of a moderate epidemic resurgence.”
Projection over 12 weeks of behavioral evolution · 9 profiles of relationship to health risk
The population does not wait for official announcements to act. In 5 of 10 regions, self-regulation precedes measures by 8 to 14 days. Messages that validate this self-regulation achieve higher adherence than those that get ahead of it: same content, opposite effect.
- ADHERENCE TO MEASURES
- +42 pts
- REPORTED FATIGUE
- −28 pts
METHOD — HEALTHCARE
A fifteen-minute study.
How a test runs on our system, from the brief to the delivered study.
1
You formulate your decision
A question in plain language, phrased the way you would phrase it in the executive committee. No formalism required.
2
The system builds the populations
Target segments are reconstructed from public aggregates and industry data. No personally identifying data enters the system.
3
The agents interview, discuss, brainstorm
The system runs the interviews itself, probes friction points, and proposes alternative scenarios you had not considered.
4
You explore the study
You talk with individual voices, challenge the reasoning, change the decision and watch the impact in real time.
Your next decision
Which decision do you want to explore?
Describe your need. We can point you to the right level of support.
