ArticleEuropean heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes2022
Improved clinical investigation and evaluation of high-risk medical devices: the rationale and objectives of CORE-MD (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices).
Article in European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Methodologies for generating and evaluating clinical and performance evidence for high-risk and innovative medical devices andFrontiers in medical technology · 2026Pooled it
- Evidence integration and bridging methodologies for high-risk and innovative medical devices andFrontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Inclusion and reporting by age, sex, and ethnicity in clinical studies of high-risk medical devices approved in the European Union.European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes · 2025Article
- Recommended methodologies for clinical investigations of high-risk medical devices-Conclusions from the European Union CORE-MD Project.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2025Review
- Medicine, healthcare and the AI act: gaps, challenges and future implications.European heart journal. Digital health · 2025Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Latitud™ Hip Replacement in Total Hip Arthroplasty: An Observational Study in Kazakhstan.Cureus · 2025Article
- CORE-MD clinical risk score for regulatory evaluation of artificial intelligence-based medical device software.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Large simple randomized controlled trials-from drugs to medical devices: lessons from recent experience.Trials · 2025Review
- Survey of Notified Bodies reveals very limited use of conditional certification for high-risk medical devices.Frontiers in medical technology · 2025Article
- Development of a minimum checklist to assess the quality of evidence produced using registry data for the evaluation of medical device safety and performance.BMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies · 2025Article
- Developing technologies to assess vascular ageing: a roadmap from VascAgeNet.Physiological measurement · 2024Review
- Evidence from clinical trials on high-risk medical devices in children: a scoping review.Pediatric research · 2024Article
- Validation of CORE-MD PMS Support Tool: A Novel Strategy for Aggregating Information from Notices of Failures to Support Medical Devices' Post-Market Surveillance.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2023Article
- Clinical evidence for high-risk medical devices used to manage diabetes: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Real-World and Regulatory Perspectives of Artificial Intelligence in Cardiovascular Imaging.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Artificial intelligence in cardiology: the debate continues.European heart journal. Digital health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the European Union (EU) the delivery of health services is a national responsibility but there are concerted actions between member states to protect public health. Approval of pharmaceutical products is the responsibility of the European Medicines Agency, whereas authorizing the placing on the market of medical devices is decentralized to independent 'conformity assessment' organizations called notified bodies. The first legal basis for an EU system of evaluating medical devices and approving their market access was the medical device directives, from the 1990s. Uncertainties about clinical evidence requirements, among other reasons, led to the EU Medical Device Regulation (2017/745) that has applied since May 2021. It provides general principles for clinical investigations but few methodological details-which challenges responsible authorities to set appropriate balances between regulation and innovation, pre- and post-market studies, and clinical trials and real-world evidence. Scientific experts should advise on methods and standards for assessing and approving new high-risk devices, and safety, efficacy, and transparency of evidence should be paramount. The European Commission recently awarded a Horizon 2020 grant to a consortium led by the European Society of Cardiology and the European Federation of National Associations of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, that will review methodologies of clinical investigations, advise on study designs, and develop recommendations for aggregating clinical data from registries and other real-world sources. The CORE-MD project (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices) will run until March 2024; here we describe how it may contribute to the development of regulatory science in Europe.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.