ReviewPerspectives in clinical research
Lessons from global materiovigilance systems: What India can learn?
Review in Perspectives in clinical research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medical devices are indispensable in modern healthcare, playing a crucial role in diagnosing, treating, and managing various medical conditions. While these devices offer significant benefits, they also pose potential risks due to defects, malfunctions, or adverse events, which can lead to serious patient harm. To mitigate these risks, materiovigilance - the systematic monitoring, detection, assessment, and prevention of adverse events related to medical devices - is essential for ensuring their safety, efficacy, and reliability. Many developed nations have established robust materiovigilance frameworks, incorporating stringent regulatory oversight, mandatory reporting mechanisms, and active stakeholder involvement. Countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and those within the European Union have implemented comprehensive postmarket surveillance programs that emphasize real-time adverse event reporting, manufacturer accountability, and transparent data sharing. Regulatory agencies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency enforce compliance through strict regulations, periodic safety evaluations, and corrective actions to address identified risks. These systems encourage proactive surveillance, industry responsibility, and public access to safety information, fostering trust in medical devices. In contrast, India's materiovigilance system is still evolving. The Materiovigilance Programme of India, launched in 2015, is a crucial initiative aimed at improving medical device safety. However, challenges remain, such as limited mandatory reporting, low awareness among healthcare professionals, underreporting of adverse events, and inconsistent regulatory enforcement. By analyzing global best practices, India can strengthen its materiovigilance framework through enhanced reporting infrastructure, greater stakeholder engagement, and stricter regulatory policies.
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.