AHA

SHUR Gap-Finder • Network Intelligence Brief

The Attention Paradox

The world’s most authoritative voice in cardiovascular health is losing the attention of the people it exists to serve.

American Heart Association February 2, 2026 Prepared for AHA Leadership SHUR Creative Partners

100

Years of Impact

$6.1B+

Research Invested

6 in 10

Women at Risk by 2050

38%

Women in CV Trials, 2010–17

The Challenge I

AHA faces a defining institutional challenge: campaign fatigue after 20 years of Go Red for Women. Recognition is high, but engagement is declining where it matters most, among younger and underresourced women.

The shift from treatment to prevention creates an opening AHA must own. Wearable sensors, AI diagnostics, and consumer health platforms are reshaping how people relate to their own health, daily, not annually.

“New health companies and food brands compete for the trust AHA has historically held.”

SHUR Network Intelligence, February 2, 2026

Apple, Google, Whoop, and Noom are building daily health relationships that AHA’s event-based model meets people once a year. Becoming a daily presence takes a different way of working.

AHA’s scientific authority is unmatched, but science alone doesn’t make AHA part of what people do each day. We analyzed what people say online to see what gets talked about and what doesn’t.

By mapping what people say online about AHA, cardiovascular health, and women’s health, we find the three topics no one connects, and those are where AHA can move first.

The Context: A Healthcare Inflection Point II

Personal agency in healthcare is restructuring who people trust and how they engage.

Patients are becoming participants. The passive recipient model that sustained institutional health authority for decades is eroding.

Wearable sensors and AI are making prevention continuous rather than episodic. A person’s Apple Watch monitors their heart rhythm 24/7. AHA’s annual checkup messaging competes with always-on data.

Health trust is increasingly local. National campaigns need hyperlocal delivery. Community health workers, local clinics, and trusted neighborhood figures carry more weight than national billboards in underresourced communities.

Self-care is now seen as a necessity rather than a treat. The pandemic permanently shifted how people think about proactive health management. They now pursue wellness to protect themselves, not just to feel better.

AHA’s 2030 Impact Goal to increase healthy life expectancy requires reaching populations that don’t attend galas. Moving the needle from 66 to 68 years of healthy life means reaching the people hardest to reach, not those easiest to invite to a gala.

By the Numbers III

$6.1B+	AHA research investment since 1949: the foundational credibility no competitor can replicate
6 in 10	Women who will have heart disease by 2050: the scale of unaddressed risk
38%	Women’s share of cardiovascular trial participants, 2010–2017: the representation deficit
8 of 10	Drugs withdrawn (1997–2000) that posed greater health risks for women: GAO finding
$16M	Go Red for Women raised in 2022: financial success masking declining engagement
$20M	AHA invested in Go Red Research Network, 2016–2021
20+	Years of Go Red campaign: brand recognition at peak, behavioral engagement in decline
66→68	AHA’s 2030 goal: healthy life expectancy increase in years, which requires reaching the hardest-to-reach

The Shape of the Conversation IV

We mapped the public conversation around AHA into seven topic areas and found three structural gaps where the organization is absent. Source: SHUR Network Analysis.

95Topics

273Connections

0.66Separation

7Topic Areas

Health Insights (47%)

AI Medicine (16%)

Research Funding (15%)

Fundraising Impact (6%)

Equity Education (6%)

Maternal Health (5%)

Behavior Change (5%)

Health Insights

47%

AI Medicine

16%

Research Funding

15%

Fundraising Impact

Equity Education

Maternal Health

Behavior Change

Structural Gaps: Primary Findings V

Critical: Gap 1

Research Investment ↔ Community Engagement

The $6.1 Billion Translation Failure

AHA has invested over $6.1 billion in research, yet community engagement is declining. AHA’s research findings aren’t reaching the people who would change their habits because of them. Go Red’s financial success ($16M/year) masks declining actual engagement with target populations. The people who need AHA’s science most rarely encounter it in a form they can actually use.

High Priority: Gap 2

AI/Wearable Revolution ↔ AHA Research Infrastructure

Advisor Without a Platform

AHA published guidance on AI best practices in cardiovascular care but has no consumer-facing technology platform. The organization is positioned as an AI advisor that publishes guidance, rather than a player that builds the products people use. Competitors already own the daily relationship; AHA owns the science behind it. AHA’s authority could make people trust health AI, but only if it builds products instead of just guidelines.

Notable: Gap 3

AI-Enabled Prevention ↔ Maternal/Women’s Health

The Unmade Connection

Despite expanding into maternal health and digital health in the 2024–2028 policy agenda, AHA has not connected its AI vision to its women’s health mandate. AI-powered wearables AHA’s AI work and its women’s-health mandate never meet, because no program connects them. No one is combining AI and women’s heart health yet, and it fits AHA’s mission exactly.

Complete Gap Analysis: 10 Gaps Across 4 Categories VI

Structural Gaps

Structural: Gap 01

The Guru Gap

AHA wants to be a lifelong health partner but has no continuous engagement mechanism. Annual campaigns and luncheons cannot build daily trust. Going from once-a-year campaigns to staying in touch daily takes a completely different way of working.

Structural: Gap 02

The Technology Platform Gap

No consumer-facing digital product. Wearable companies own AHA certifies devices and publishes guidance, but nothing it makes sits on a person’s wrist or phone day to day.

Structural: Gap 03

The Delivery Model Gap

National campaigns in a world where health trust is local. Go Red is one-size-fits-all when personalization is expected. Communities that need AHA most, rural, underresourced, non-English-speaking, are the least served by these national campaigns.

Topical Gaps

Topical: Gap 04

Behavior Change Science

BCTO (Behavior Change Technique Ontology) and health communication models exist but are absent from AHA’s public-facing programs. The science of changing health behavior is well established, but AHA only uses it in clinical guidelines, not in the programs people see.

Topical: Gap 05

Younger Women

Campaign recognition is lowest among the most vulnerable populations. No digital-native engagement pathway exists. Women under 40, the cohort where early intervention has the most impact, are invisible in AHA’s engagement data.

Topical: Gap 06

Male Allies

Men are absent from women’s heart health discourse. No activation model for partners, sons, fathers. Heart disease in women affects entire families, but AHA’s messaging treats it as a women-only conversation.

Depth Gaps

Depth: Gap 07

Health Equity Beyond Events

Social determinants of health (SDOH) framework is referenced in AHA communications but not operationalized in community programming. Equity stays a talking point instead of becoming real programs in the communities that need them.

Depth: Gap 08

Self-Directed Prevention

Personal agency is acknowledged as a healthcare trend but AHA provides no tools for self-management. People are tracking their own health data every day; AHA gives them no tools to understand or act on it.

Audience Gaps

Audience: Gap 09

Underresourced Communities

Health equity messaging does not reach populations who don’t attend galas or Red Dress concerts. AHA’s raises money through galas, which draw wealthy donors and miss the communities with the highest cardiovascular risk.

Audience: Gap 10

Clinicians as Advocates

AHA has clinician education programs but a weak clinician-to-patient advocacy pipeline for women’s specific risks. Doctors trust AHA; patients trust their doctors. AHA barely uses this: doctors who trust it could tell patients about women’s heart risks, but mostly aren’t.

Research Questions VII

How can AI-powered wearables bridge the gap between AHA’s cardiovascular research and real-world maternal health prevention?

What delivery model transforms AHA from annual campaign awareness to daily health partnership, the “guru” model that replaces event-based engagement with a persistent, personalized relationship?

How can behavior change science (BCTO, Health Belief Model) be operationalized in digitally-native, hyperlocal health engagement that reaches younger women and underresourced communities where they already are?

What would an AHA consumer technology platform look like that competes for daily health attention alongside Apple Health, Google Health, and Whoop, leveraging AHA’s scientific credibility as its core differentiator?

How can AHA’s Go Red franchise be reinvented from awareness campaign to prevention ecosystem, with AI, wearables, and personalization at the core?

Competitive Lens VIII

Dimension	AHA Today	Apple / Fitbit	Whoop	Noom / WW	Opportunity
Trust & Authority	Highest, 100 years	Growing via hardware	Niche fitness	Diet-focused	AHA has the authority nobody can replicate
Daily Engagement	Low, event-based	Very high, wrist	Very high, wrist	High, app	The gap AHA must close
Personalization	None	Sensor-driven	Sensor + coaching	Algorithm + coaching	AHA needs a technology partner
Women’s Health	Go Red (fatigued)	General tracking	General tracking	Diet only	Underserved across all competitors
Scientific Rigor	Gold standard	Consumer-grade	Consumer-grade	Evidence-based	AHA’s differentiator, but only if delivered
Local Trust	Event-based	None	None	None	AHA’s network could enable this
Prevention Focus	Emerging	Activity tracking	Recovery	Weight management	Wide open space for AHA

Actionable Intelligence: Six Actions IX

01 Revenue & Integrity

Audit the Heart-Check Certification Program

Our analysis reveals that the Heart-Check mark has become a pay-to-play certification. Large CPG companies pay significant fees to display it, and many certified products (certain sugary cereals, processed grains) meet technical criteria for low fat/cholesterol but are high in refined carbohydrates. Commission an independent review of every Heart-Check product against current metabolic science (not just legacy lipid criteria). Sunset certifications that no longer align with AHA’s own research on cardiovascular risk. The short-term revenue hit is real, but it would protect the credibility a 100-year brand depends on.

02 Engagement Model

Shift from “Awareness” to Behavioral Conversion

AHA brand awareness sits at ~92%. Adult obesity is at ~42%. Hypertension is rising. Awareness is a vanity metric. People know heart disease is bad; they know AHA exists. But awareness doesn’t change the price of a salad vs. a burger, and it doesn’t reach food deserts. Redirect a meaningful percentage of awareness-campaign spend into behavioral efficacy programs, interventions measured by health outcomes (blood pressure reduction, A1C change), not impressions. Pilot in 3 cities. Publish results. Let the data make the case for scaling.

03 Fundraising

Reinvent the Gala Model or Replace It

The 400+ annual Heart Ball events are high-cost “Positive Space”: black ties, expensive venues, recognition awards. For every dollar raised, a significant portion is consumed by production overhead. These events are built around recognizing donors more than helping patients. Pick 10 local chapters. Run A/B tests: traditional gala vs. a new “Social Impact Investor” model where donors receive measurable outcomes data (e.g., “Your $50K funded 200 community blood pressure screenings, resulting in 34 early interventions”). Measure donor retention, cost-per-dollar-raised, and downstream health impact. Let the numbers decide which model wins.

04 Technology

Build an AHA Consumer Health Platform

Apple, Google, and Whoop own the daily health relationship AHA aspires to. AHA publishes wearable guidelines but has no surface where a person interacts with AHA-powered intelligence every day. Launch an RFP for a technology partnership, not a logo-on-a-device deal, but a co-developed platform where AHA’s cardiovascular science explains what a person’s wearable data actually means. The unique selling proposition: “Your Apple Watch collects the data. AHA tells you what it means.” No competitor can match AHA’s scientific authority in this space.

05 Women’s Health

Connect AI + Wearables to the Maternal Health Mandate

AHA expanded into maternal health in its 2024–2028 policy agenda, but has not bridged this to its digital health vision. AI-powered wearables could revolutionize maternal cardiovascular monitoring, detecting pre-eclampsia risk, gestational hypertension, and postpartum cardiomyopathy earlier than any current clinical protocol. Fund a dedicated research track: “AI-Enabled Maternal Heart Health.” Partner with an academic medical center and a wearable manufacturer. Own this intersection before anyone else does. It aligns perfectly with Go Red’s evolution and addresses the clinical trial gender gap (women make up just 38% of cardiovascular trial participants, per AHA’s own Circulation study).

06 Policy & Infrastructure

Pivot Lobbying to Infrastructure Mandates

AHA has significant policy influence but deploys it primarily for awareness campaigns and research funding. The bigger forces (food policy, urban design, sugar subsidies) remain underused. Allocate lobbying resources toward three concrete infrastructure targets: (1) federal tax incentives for fresh-produce availability in food deserts, (2) municipal “walkability” mandates in new development, (3) rebalancing agricultural subsidies away from corn syrup toward whole foods. These are the unglamorous, structural fixes, far more impactful than another awareness campaign.

Brand Power Score X

3.39

/ 5.0

Strong: Lower Boundary

Critical Finding: AHA has high trust but low behavioral conversion. The gap between Trust (3.7) and Loyalty (2.8) is the most actionable number here. Closing it means going from telling people things once a year to staying in touch with them personally.

Published Benchmarks

Morning Consult Net Trust2022+74.94
Harris Poll Health Brand RankEquiTrend 2013#1
Charity NavigatorFour-Star99/100
CharityWatch Grade·C
Customer NPSComparably+41
Employee NPSComparably+20
Annual RevenueFY2023$1.07B
Cumulative Research·$6.1B+
Brand Awareness (U.S. adults)·~92%
Go Red Awareness (target demo)·~50%

Dimension Scores

Trust

3.7 35%

Mission

3.2 30%

Awareness

4.0 15%

Loyalty

2.8 10%

Differentiation

2.5 10%

The Trust-Loyalty Gap

Trust at 3.7. Loyalty at 2.8. A 0.9-point delta that captures the core problem: people believe in AHA, but that belief doesn’t change how they live. The world trusts AHA, but that trust doesn’t reach what people eat for breakfast.

The Bridge

AHA has everything but the bridge.

AHA has the scientific authority, the network, and the mission. What’s missing is the way to connect that science to what people actually do every day.

The organizations that close this gap, between a trusted institution and people running their own health, will define health engagement for the next decade.

AHA is the one organization that can make that connection.