It's also not really a science advisory board and more of a medical/clinical board. This would be great for making sure the tech is working in the hands of its clients, but that seems to me to be putting the cart before the horse maybe. Is not the tech itself something that needs advising? Maybe not - maybe the tech is so basic, not particularly novel, or so well completed that there is no further technology push to be made. Or maybe these people are actually really capable with respect to basic research in addition to their medical focus - hard to tell without more detailed biographies.