Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41262422›Full record

ReviewThe Lancet regional health. Europe2025

Recommended methodologies for clinical investigations of high-risk medical devices-Conclusions from the European Union CORE-MD Project.

Alan G Fraser, Sergio Buccheri, Robert A Byrne, Per Kjaersgaard-Andersen, Stefan James, Peter Jüni, Lia Bally, Richard Bulbulia, Berthold V Koletzko, Martin J Landray and 14 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
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

24 authors.

Alan G FraserDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital of Wales, and School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Heath Park, Cardiff CF14 4XW, UK.
Sergio BuccheriDepartment of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University Hospital, and Uppsala Clinical Research Center, Uppsala Science Park, Dag Hammarskjölds Väg 38, Uppsala SE-751 85, Sweden.
Robert A ByrneCardiovascular Research Institute (CVRI) Dublin and Department of Cardiology, Mater Private Network, Dublin, Ireland.
Per Kjaersgaard-AndersenDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Vejle Hospital, South Danish University, Vejle 7100, Denmark.
Stefan JamesDepartment of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University Hospital, and Uppsala Clinical Research Center, Uppsala Science Park, Dag Hammarskjölds Väg 38, Uppsala SE-751 85, Sweden.
Peter JüniClinical Trial Service Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK.
Lia BallyDepartment of Diabetes, Endocrinology, Nutritional Medicine and Metabolism, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Freiburgstrasse 15, Bern 3010, Switzerland.
Richard BulbuliaClinical Trial Service Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK.
Berthold V KoletzkoDepartment of Paediatrics, Dr. von Hauner Children's Hospital, LMU University Hospital, and German Center for Child and Adolescent Health, Lindwurmstr. 4, Munich 80337, Germany.
Martin J LandrayClinical Trial Service Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK.
Claudia LouatiEuropean Patients Forum, Chaussée d'Etterbeek 180, Brussels 1040, Belgium.
Anne LübbekeDivision of Orthopaedics & Trauma Surgery, Geneva University Hospitals and University of Geneva, Switzerland.
Perla J Marang-van de MheenSafety & Security Science, Delft University of Technology, Jaffalaan 5, 2628 BX, Delft, the Netherlands.
Peter McCullochNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Headington, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK.
Bernadeta Patro-GolabDepartment of Paediatrics, Dr. von Hauner Children's Hospital, LMU University Hospital, and German Center for Child and Adolescent Health, Lindwurmstr. 4, Munich 80337, Germany.
Frank E RademakersBiomedical Sciences, KU Leuven, Herestraat 49, Leuven 3000, Belgium.
Petra Schnell-InderstInstitute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT TIROL - University for Health Sciences and Technology, Eduard-Wallnoefer-Zentrum 1, Hall in Tirol 6060, Austria.
George C M SiontisDepartment of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Marina TorreIstituto Superiore di Sanità, Viale Regina Elena, 299 00161, Roma, Italy.
Claudia WildAustrian Institute of Health Technology Assessment, Garnisongasse 7/20, Vienna 1090, Austria.
Yasemin ZeislEuropean Patients Forum, Chaussée d'Etterbeek 180, Brussels 1040, Belgium.
Tom MelvinInstitute for Clinical Trials, College of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Galway, Ireland.
Rob G H H NelissenDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden 2300 RC, the Netherlands.
CORE–MD Consortium

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Before a high-risk medical device is approved for implantation into patients, there should be evidence not only of its performance and safety with a favourable benefit-risk ratio, but also of its clinical efficacy. Regulatory guidance on study methodologies is lacking, however, so the European Commission funded the CORE-MD project (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices) to advise regulators on appropriate designs for clinical trials of high-risk devices. The CORE-MD consortium recommends that evaluation should be planned in four stages. Randomised controlled trials should be performed more often, against active comparators reflecting the best available treatment, or using sham interventions with ethical safeguards. Large trials can be managed efficiently using an electronic database or registry. Non-randomised clinical studies can apply objective performance criteria or other validated patient-relevant outcome measures, with adjustments to minimise bias. Full transparency of results from clinical investigations is essential. Proportionate regulation of breakthrough or orphan devices for independently-defined serious unmet needs may involve approval with less evidence, but on condition of subsequent confirmatory studies. These CORE-MD consensus proposals have been submitted to European Union medical device regulators, to be considered as a basis for more transparent and predictable requirements for clinical evidence. Funding: The CORE-MD project was funded as a Coordination and Support action from the European UnionHorizon 2020 research and innovation programme, under grant agreement 965246.

Indexed as

Hierarchy of evidenceHigh-risk medical devicesRandomised controlled trialsRegistriesTrial methodologies

Identifiers

PMID41262422
PMCPMC12624797

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.