Search Results

The TED 200T7 is intended to continuously measure and display the concentration of oxygen in gas mixtures used in medical applications such as anesthesia, respiratory therapy, and is intended for adult, pediatric and neonatal populations.

Not Found

The provided text is a 510(k) clearance letter from the FDA for a device called "Ted 200T7 Oxygen Monitor." This document primarily deals with regulatory clearance and establishes substantial equivalence to a predicate device. It does not contain information about specific acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets those criteria, nor does it detail a clinical performance study with human subjects or AI components.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information from this document. The document confirms the device is substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices, which is a regulatory hurdle, not a detailed performance study as you've described for AI/ML devices.

To answer your prompt, I would need a different type of document, such as a summary of safety and effectiveness data (SSED) or a clinical study report that details the device's performance, acceptance criteria, and the methodology of a specific study.

Ask a specific question about this device

The TED 60T is intended to accurately measure and display the concentration of oxygen in gas mixtures used in medical applications such as anesthesia, respiratory therapy, and neonatal care. The TED 60T is intended for use only as a secondary measuring device to verify and spot check the concentration of oxygen in gas mixtures. The TED 60T should not be used as a primary monitoring device.

Not Found

I apologize, but the provided text from the FDA 510(k) premarket notification for the TED 60T Oxygen Analyzer does not contain the information requested regarding acceptance criteria and a study proving the device meets those criteria.

This document is a letter from the FDA to the manufacturer, acknowledging the 510(k) submission and stating that the device is substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device. It permits the manufacturer to market the device subject to general controls.

Specifically, the document lacks the following information:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: This is not present. The letter mentions that the device is intended to "accurately measure and display the concentration of oxygen," but no specific performance metrics or acceptance criteria are provided.
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: Not mentioned.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth... and their qualifications: Not mentioned.
4. Adjudication method: Not mentioned.
5. Multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study: Not mentioned. This type of study is more typically associated with imaging-based AI devices, not a physical sensor like an oxygen analyzer.
6. Standalone performance: While the device is standalone in terms of its function (an oxygen analyzer), no performance study of its standalone capabilities against specific criteria is detailed.
7. Type of ground truth used: Not mentioned.
8. Sample size for the training set: Not mentioned. Oxygen analyzers are typically hardware devices; discussions of "training sets" are more relevant to software-based or AI/ML devices.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not mentioned.

The document primarily focuses on the regulatory approval and the device's intended use. It does not delve into the specific technical studies or performance data that would have been submitted as part of the 510(k) application itself.

Ask a specific question about this device