ArticleInformation and software technology2022
Guidelines for the development of a critical software under emergency.
Article in Information and software technology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Embedded Sensor Systems in Medical Devices: Requisites and Challenges Ahead.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Guidelines for the development of a critical software under emergency.Information and software technology · 2022Article
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 at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, an international and heterogeneous team of scientists collaborated on a social project to produce a mechanical ventilator for intensive care units (MVM). MVM has been conceived to be produced and used also in poor countries: it is open-source, no patents, cheap, and can be produced with materials that are easy to retrieve. Objective: The objective of this work is to extract from the experience of the MVM development and software certification a set of lessons learned and then guidelines that can help developers to produce safety-critical devices in similar emergency situations. Method: We conducted a case study. We had full access to source code, comments on code, change requests, test reports, every deliverable (60 in total) produced for the software certification (safety concepts, requirements specifications, architecture and design, testing activities, etc.), notes, whiteboard sketches, emails, etc. We validated both lessons learned and guidelines with experts. Findings: We contribute a set of validated lessons learned and a set of validated guidelines, together with a discussion of benefits and risks of each guideline. Conclusion: In this work we share our experience in certifying software for healthcare devices produced under emergency, i.e. with strict and pressing time constraints and with the difficulty of establishing a heterogeneous development team made of volunteers. We believe that the guidelines will help engineers during the development of critical software under emergency.
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.