The Path has formed a six-member Scientific Advisory Board to guide its clinical research as the company builds evidence for AI use in mental health and behavioral support. The board, announced August 31, will advise on study design, research methodology, and interpretation of scientific findings - a response to growing scrutiny of how AI mental health products are evaluated.
The board will be chaired by Dr. Jennifer Huberty, The Path's chief science officer and founder and CEO of Fit Minded. Huberty, a behavioral research scientist with more than 250 peer-reviewed publications and a former head of science at Calm, leads the company's clinical research program in addition to chairing the new advisory group.
Who sits on the board
The advisers bring expertise across clinical psychology, psychiatry, behavioral economics, digital health implementation, health equity, regulatory science, and AI ethics.
Dr. Stephen Schueller, professor of psychology and informatics at the University of California, Irvine, researches the development, evaluation, and implementation of digital mental health interventions. Dr. Chad Stecher, associate professor and director of industry engagement at Arizona State University's College of Health Solutions, applies behavioral economics, randomized trials, and population-level analytics to long-term health behavior change.
Dr. Adrian Aguilera, Chancellor's Professor at UC Berkeley School of Social Welfare with a psychiatry appointment at UC San Francisco, directs the Digital Health Equity and Access Lab. His research examines how technology can broaden access to evidence-based mental healthcare. Dr. Risa Weisberg, professor of psychiatry at Boston University and head of clinical research at Deliberate AI, covers clinical validation, digital therapeutics, user safety, and regulatory science.
Dr. Darja Djordjevic, a psychiatrist and medical anthropologist at Harlem Hospital and Columbia University, adds expertise in psychiatry, global mental health, and responsible AI application in care.
The research challenge
"Our goal has always been to build a product grounded in science," said CEO and co-founder Dr. Anson Whitmer. "Bringing together experts with diverse perspectives strengthens our research program and helps us ask better questions, design stronger studies, and communicate findings responsibly."
The board's formation reflects a structural tension in the category: AI systems change quickly, while clinical validation demands methodological patience. The Path said the group will provide external expertise as its research program develops.
For professionals working in AI for Science & Research, the questions The Path is asking mirror broader debates about evaluation standards for AI in regulated domains. The advisers will examine how AI mental health products should be scientifically evaluated, how independent experts can contribute to research oversight, and what evidence AI therapy platforms need to establish clinical credibility.
Product positioning and scale
The Path positions its technology as a complement to licensed mental healthcare rather than a replacement. Its AI therapy and coaching app incorporates cognitive behavioral therapy, acceptance and commitment therapy, solution-focused brief therapy, and motivational interviewing. The platform identifies patterns across conversations, maintains continuity between sessions, and routes users to human support when elevated risk is detected.
The company was co-founded by neuroscientist Whitmer, entrepreneur Tyler Sheaffer, and Tony Robbins. Its technology draws in part on Whitmer's research into rumination and executive control. The Path reports more than 50,000 members and more than 2.5 million sessions supported through its platform.
Mental health carries high expectations around safety, evidence, and escalation to human care. Clinical validation and responsible product design are becoming competitive considerations alongside the capabilities of the underlying AI.
Why this matters for science and research professionals
The advisory board structure signals a shift in how AI health companies approach evidence generation. Rather than relying on internal metrics alone, The Path is outsourcing scrutiny of its research methods to independent academics. For researchers working at the intersection of AI and clinical science, this model - external boards setting study standards for commercial platforms - may become a template for how AI Research Courses & Training programs teach evaluation methodology. The board's work will produce public signals about what evidence standards AI mental health platforms are held to, which matters for anyone designing studies, reviewing claims, or building evaluation frameworks in this space.
Your membership also unlocks:
