ReviewThe Lancet regional health. Europe2025
Recommended methodologies for clinical investigations of high-risk medical devices-Conclusions from the European Union CORE-MD Project.
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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Evidence integration and bridging methodologies for high-risk and innovative medical devices andFrontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Methodologies for generating and evaluating clinical and performance evidence for high-risk and innovative medical devices andFrontiers in medical technology · 2026Pooled it
- Beyond CE Marking: The Need for Life-Cycle Health Technology Assessment of Medical Devices for Patient Safety and Health-System Value.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Analysis of the challenges in ensuring robust and effective clinical evaluation of AI-based digital medical devices.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Review
- Charting a path through high-risk medical device regulation: recommendations from the CORE-MD consortium.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2025Article
- Beyond Single Systems: How Multi-Agent AI Is Reshaping Ethics in Radiology.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Databases and registries recording the usage of cardiovascular implantable medical devices: A rapid review of the literature.JRSM cardiovascular diseaseReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.