B

Advance Directive Comparison Guide

3.55

Derivation Chain

Step 1 Digital legacy & account organization
→
Step 2 Expansion to overall end-of-life preparation
→
Step 3 Lack of understanding about advance directive options

Competitor references

No usable source links are available for this idea. Its signal notes and scores need independent verification.

Problem

Although Korea's Life-Sustaining Treatment Decision Act (enacted 2018) allows people to write advance directives, less than 4% of those in their 50s-60s have done so. People delay or avoid it because they don't understand what 'withdrawing life-sustaining treatment' specifically means—which of CPR, mechanical ventilation, dialysis, or chemotherapy they're refusing. Families also avoid the conversation entirely. Even at registration agencies (public health centers, hospitals), the explanation is completed within 20 minutes, leading many to sign without sufficient understanding.

Solution

The system explains each of the 4 life-sustaining treatment options (CPR, mechanical ventilation, dialysis, chemotherapy) and available hospice types through scenarios showing 'what happens if you choose/refuse this.' A 'conversation guide' for families to review together is provided, and once the user confirms their intent, they are connected with nearby registration agencies and appointment scheduling.

Target: Ages 55-65, living with spouse or adult children, have not written an advance directive, in good Health but willing to prepare
Revenue Model: Explanatory content and family conversation guide free; family meeting worksheet (with customized scenarios) $3.70 Per Transaction
Ecosystem Role: Regulation
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
4.0/5
U Urgency
2.0/5
M Market
2.0/5
R Realizability
5.0/5
V Validation
3.0/5
NUMR-V Scoring System
N Novelty1-5How uncommon the service is in market context.
U Urgency1-5How urgently users need this problem solved now.
M Market1-5Market size and growth potential from proxy indicators.
R Realizability1-5Buildability for a small team with realistic constraints.
V Validation1-5Validation signal quality from competition and demand data.
Each dimension is scored 1-5 and weighted into grade S/A/B/C/D.
N=.15 U=.20 M=.15 R=.30 V=.20

Feasibility (79%)

Tech Complexity
40.0/40
Data Availability
18.8/25
MVP Timeline
20.0/20
API Bonus
0.0/15
Feasibility Breakdown
Tech Complexity/ 40Difficulty of core implementation stack.
Data Availability/ 25Practical availability and cost of required data.
MVP Timeline/ 20Expected time to ship a usable MVP.
API Bonus/ 15Bonus for viable public API leverage.
Total 100 points; below 50% is filtered out.

Market Validation (50/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
Timing
14.0/20
Revenue Signals
4.5/15
Pick-Axe Fit
7.5/15
Solo Buildability
10.0/10
Validation Breakdown
Competition/ 20Signal quality from competitor landscape.
Market Demand/ 20Demand proxies from search and mention patterns.
Timing/ 20Fit with current shifts in tech, behavior, and regulation.
Revenue Signals/ 15Reference evidence for monetization viability.
Pick-Axe Fit/ 15How well the concept serves participants in a trend.
Solo Buildability/ 10Practicality for lean-team implementation.
Total 100 points; below 50 is filtered out.

Technical Requirements

Frontend [low] Backend [low]
Dashboard