Search Results

The Bionike One Step Opiate(Morphine) Test is a rapid immunochromatographic competitive assay used to screen human urine for the presence of morphine and its metabolites at a cutoff concentration of 300ng/mL. The test is qualitative and provides only a preliminary analytical result which must be confirmed using GC/MS. The test is for use by health care professionals only.

Not Found

This is a 510(k) clearance letter for the Bionike AQ™ Opiates (morphine) Test, which is an in vitro diagnostic device. The letter determines substantial equivalence to a predicate device, allowing the sale of the device.

Based on the provided document, here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and study information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly state specific acceptance criteria or report detailed device performance metrics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, accuracy) in a tabular format as would be found in a study summary.

However, the "Indications for Use" section (page 2) provides a key piece of information that can be inferred as a performance parameter:

Note: This is a very limited interpretation as the document is a clearance letter, not a detailed study report. The 300 ng/mL value is a threshold for detection, not a performance metric like sensitivity or specificity. A full study report would include those details.

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

The provided document does not contain any information regarding:

• The sample size used for the test set.
• The data provenance (e.g., country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective).

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications of Those Experts

The provided document does not contain any information regarding:

• The number of experts used to establish ground truth.
• The qualifications of those experts.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The provided document does not contain any information regarding the adjudication method used for the test set.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, and Effect Size

The provided document does not contain any information indicating that a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, nor does it mention any effect sizes related to human reader improvement with or without AI assistance. This device is an in-vitro diagnostic test, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool for human readers.

6. If a Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Was Done

The device described is an "immunochromatographic competitive assay." This is a laboratory test, not an algorithm. Therefore, the concept of "standalone (algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance)" as typically applied to AI/ML devices is not directly applicable here. The test itself is a standalone diagnostic tool once run by a healthcare professional, providing a preliminary analytical result without real-time human interpretation within the test mechanism.

The document states: "The test is qualitative and provides only a preliminary analytical result which must be confirmed using GC/MS. The test is for use by health care professionals only." This indicates the device acts as a standalone screening tool that requires subsequent confirmatory testing and professional interpretation.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth for detecting opiates (morphine) in urine, as hinted by the document, would be the results from a confirmatory method. The document explicitly states: "The test... provides only a preliminary analytical result which must be confirmed using GC/MS."

Therefore, the type of ground truth used for validation would likely be Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS), which is a highly accurate and commonly accepted gold standard for drug confirmation in toxicology.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The provided document does not contain any information regarding the sample size for the training set. This is consistent with a medical device 510(k) clearance letter for an in vitro diagnostic test rather than an AI/ML device that requires explicit training data.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

Since this is not an AI/ML device, the concept of a "training set" in the context of machine learning does not apply. If there were any "training" or development involved for the assay characteristics before the pivotal study, the ground truth would still likely have been established using a highly accurate confirmatory method like GC/MS to ensure the assay's performance characteristics (like the 300 ng/mL cutoff) were correctly set. However, the document does not elaborate on this.

Ask a specific question about this device