Search Results

The indication for use of the air conduction hearing aids in this submission is to anglify sound for individuals with impaired hearing. The devices are indicated for individuals with losses in the following category(fes), (Check appropriate space(s)); Severity: Mild, Moderate. Configuration: High Frequency - Precipitously Sloping, Gradually Sloping, Flat. Other: Low tolerance To Loudness.

Not Found

I am sorry, but the provided text does not contain the detailed information necessary to answer your request about the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them. The document is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter for a hearing aid from 1997. While it mentions the indications for use and states that the device is "substantially equivalent" to previously marketed devices, it does not provide:

• A table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance.
• Details of a specific study, including sample sizes, data provenance, ground truth establishment, or expert qualifications.
• Information regarding MRMC comparative effectiveness studies or standalone algorithm performance.

The letter is a regulatory approval document based on a past submission, not a detailed technical report of the studies performed.

Ask a specific question about this device

The indication for use of the air conduction hearing alos in this submission is to amplify sound for individuals with impaired hearing. The devices are indicated for individuals with losses in the following category(fes). (Check appropriate space(s)); Severity: X1. Slight X2. Mild X3. Moderate X4. Severe 5. Profound Configuration: X1. High Frequency - Precipitously Sloping X2. Gradually Sloping X3. Reverse Slope X4. Flat 5. Other Other X1. Low tolerance To Loudness X2. Normal Dynamic Range 3. ______

Not Found

I am sorry, but the provided text from the FDA 510(k) notification for "Loripro and Loripro II Hearing Aids" (K972058) does not contain any information about acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets acceptance criteria.

The document is an FDA letter granting substantial equivalence for the device, based on its indications for use. It primarily focuses on regulatory classification, general controls, and an advisory about potential electromagnetic interference.

Therefore, I cannot fulfill your request to describe the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them, as this information is not present in the provided text.

Here's a breakdown of why this information isn't available based on your request:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: Not included in the document.
2. Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance: Not included in the document.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not included in the document.
4. Adjudication method for the test set: Not included in the document.
5. If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done: Not included in the document.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not included in the document.
7. The type of ground truth used: Not included in the document.
8. The sample size for the training set: Not included in the document.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not included in the document.

The document is purely a regulatory letter concerning the substantial equivalence of the device to previously marketed hearing aids, allowing it to proceed to market. It does not elaborate on the specific performance studies or acceptance criteria that would have been submitted as part of the 510(k) application itself.

Ask a specific question about this device

Ask a specific question about this device