ReviewDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2018
[Medical Device Regulation as current challenge for the legally safe introduction of new technologies].
Review in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Medical Device Development Process, and Associated Risks and Legislative Aspects-Systematic Review.Frontiers in public health · 2020Pooled it
- Navigating Medical Device Safety: Current Status, Challenges, and Future Regulatory Directions.Drug safety · 2026Review
- Approaching 3D printing in oral and maxillofacial surgery - suggestions for structured clinical standards.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2024Review
- Early clinical outcome and learning curve following unilateral primary total knee arthroplasty after introduction of a novel total knee arthroplasty system.World journal of orthopedics · 2020Article
- [Implementation of new technologies in the DRG system under economic aspects].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The main goal of the Medical Device Regulation (MDR) is the improvement of patient safety by laying down rules concerning the approval of medical devices for human use in the European Union. The MDR contains an extension of the conformity assessment procedure for products in the higher risk categories IIb and III. The clinical testing and assessment are regulated more strictly by e.g. the scrutiny process conducted by expert panels following the technical certification. The demand for documentation is vastly increasing due to more detailed registration (UDI) and an extension of post-market surveillance. The German Society of Surgery (DGCH) and the German Society for Biomedical Engineering have already defined a staged concept for innovation testing and clinical assessment during finalization of the MDR that contains the highest level of patient safety while simultaneously maintaining the potential for innovation. Essential elements are present in the MDR and can be implemented in a targeted way. The 3‑year phase of national MDR-implementation must be used for a proactive adaptation. The DGCH is represented in the advisory council of the Federal Ministry of Health (BMG) by the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF). The aim is a responsible harmonization of national structures with the regulations of the MDR by the construction of specific registries which should be the responsibility of medical societies. The early integration of health technology assessment will be of importance during the planning phase of product development to facilitate a positive decision on reimbursement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30187174What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.