Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41171641›Full record

ArticleJMIR AI2025

Predetermined Change Control Plans: Guiding Principles for Advancing Safe, Effective, and High-Quality AI-ML Technologies.

Eduardo Carvalho, Miguel Mascarenhas, Francisca Pinheiro, Ricardo Correia, Sandra Balseiro, Guilherme Barbosa, Ana Guerra, Dulce Oliveira, Rita Moura, André Martins Dos Santos and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR AI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Regulatory science for AI-basedJournal of pathology informatics · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Eduardo Carvalho *Institute of Science and Innovation in Mechanical and Industrial Engineering (INEGI), Campus da FEUP Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 400, Porto, 4200-465, Portugal, +351 229578710.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-0729-7008
Miguel Mascarenhas *Faculty of Medicine, Universidade do Porto (FMUP), Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0340-0830
Francisca PinheiroBioGHP, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-3549-5907
Ricardo CorreiaBioGHP, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-1237-6632
Sandra BalseiroSmartMDR, Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3721-8233
Guilherme BarbosaInstitute of Science and Innovation in Mechanical and Industrial Engineering (INEGI), Campus da FEUP Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 400, Porto, 4200-465, Portugal, +351 229578710.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-5001-5539
Ana GuerraInstitute of Science and Innovation in Mechanical and Industrial Engineering (INEGI), Campus da FEUP Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 400, Porto, 4200-465, Portugal, +351 229578710.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3979-0874
Dulce OliveiraInstitute of Science and Innovation in Mechanical and Industrial Engineering (INEGI), Campus da FEUP Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 400, Porto, 4200-465, Portugal, +351 229578710.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8758-471X
Rita MouraInstitute of Science and Innovation in Mechanical and Industrial Engineering (INEGI), Campus da FEUP Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 400, Porto, 4200-465, Portugal, +351 229578710.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3042-9257
André Martins Dos SantosFaculty of Medicine, Universidade do Porto (FMUP), Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9676-6128
Nilza RamiãoInstitute of Science and Innovation in Mechanical and Industrial Engineering (INEGI), Campus da FEUP Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 400, Porto, 4200-465, Portugal, +351 229578710.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4633-8600

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Unlabelled: The adaptive nature of artificial intelligence (AI), with its ability to improve performance through continuous learning, offers substantial benefits across various sectors. However, current regulatory frameworks are not intended to accommodate this adaptive nature, and they have prolonged approval timelines, sometimes exceeding one year for some AI-enabled devices. This creates significant challenges for manufacturers who must deal with lengthy waits and submit multiple approval requests for AI-enabled device software functions as they are updated. In response, regulatory agencies like the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have introduced guidelines to better support the approval process for continuously evolving AI technologies. This article explores the FDA's concept of predetermined change control plans and how they can streamline regulatory oversight by reducing the need for repeated approvals, while ensuring safety and compliance. This can help reduce the burden for regulatory bodies and decrease waiting times for approval decisions, therefore fostering innovation, increasing market uptake, and exploiting the benefits of artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencehealth caremachine learningpredetermined change control plansregulation

Identifiers

PMID41171641
PMCPMC12577744

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.