Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31318470›Full record

ReviewPharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2019

EU postmarket surveillance plans for medical devices.

Josep Pane, Reynold D C Francisca, Katia M C Verhamme, Marcia Orozco, Hilde Viroux, Irene Rebollo, Miriam C J M Sturkenboom

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Quality analysis of manufacturer's incident reports regarding medical devices.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Josep PaneDepartment of Medical Informatics, Erasmus Medical Center - University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0869-2833
Reynold D C FranciscaDepartment of Medical Informatics, Erasmus Medical Center - University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Katia M C VerhammeDepartment of Medical Informatics, Erasmus Medical Center - University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Marcia OrozcoDepartment of Patient Safety, Alcon, Fort Worth, Texas.
Hilde VirouxDepartment of Regulatory Affairs, HCL Technologies, Frisco, Texas.
Irene RebolloEu2P European Programme in Pharmacovigilance and Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Bordeaux Segalen, Bordeaux, France.
Miriam C J M SturkenboomDepartment of Global Health, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRecent public health safety issues involving medical devices have led to a growing demand to improve the current passive-reactive postmarket surveillance (PMS) system. Various European Union (EU) national competent authorities have started to focus on strengthening the postmarket risk evaluation. As a consequence, the new EU medical device regulation was published; it includes the concept of a PMS Plan.

methodsThis publication reviewed Annex III Technical Documentation on PMS and Annex XIV Part B: Postmarket clinical follow-up from the new Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council on medical devices.

resultsThe results of the PMS activities will be described in the PMS plan and will be used to update other related documents. A modular approach to structure the contents of the PMS plan will help to consistently update other PMS information. It is our suggestion that the PMS plan should consist of a PMS plan Core and a PMS plan Supplement. The PMS plan Core document will describe the PMS system, and the PMS plan Supplement will outline the specific activities performed by the manufacturer for a particular medical device.

conclusionsThe PMS plan may serve as a thorough tool for the benefit-risk evaluation of medical devices. If properly developed and implemented, it will function as a key player in the establishment of a new framework for proactive safety evaluation of medical devices.

Indexed as

Device ApprovalEquipment and SuppliesEuropean UnionFeasibility StudiesProduct Surveillance, PostmarketingRisk Assessmentmedical devicespharmacoepidemiologypostmarket surveillance planrisk managementsafety evaluation

Identifiers

PMID31318470
PMCPMC6771951

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.