Search Results

These sets are indicated for the infusion of fluids into the body below the surface of the skin when attached to a fluid reservoir.

Comfort™ and Inset™ Subcutaneous Infusion Sets For Use with the Abbot Pump

Based on the provided documents, here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance

2. Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)

The document states "Verification testing confirmed the product meets their specifications." However, it does not specify the sample size used for this testing, nor does it provide details on the data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective or prospective nature).

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g. radiologist with 10 years of experience)

This information is not provided in the document. The submission is for a medical device (subcutaneous infusion set), not an AI/imaging device requiring expert ground truth establishment in the typical sense. The "ground truth" here would be the device's adherence to its mechanical/performance specifications.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set

This information is not provided and is not applicable to this type of device submission. Adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 are typically used in studies involving human interpretation or performance assessment, which is not the primary focus for a physical infusion set.

5. If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, If so, what was the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance

An MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not conducted. This type of study is relevant for AI-powered diagnostic tools or imaging devices, not for a subcutaneous infusion set.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the loop performance) was done

This is not applicable as the device is a physical medical device (infusion set), not an algorithm or AI system.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)

For this type of device, the "ground truth" for the performance data would be the engineering specifications and functional requirements of the infusion set. The verification testing would have assessed these against objective measurements (e.g., fluid flow rate, connection integrity, material strength, biocompatibility, etc.). The document does not explicitly state the specific types of ground truth used, but it implies adherence to design and performance specifications.

8. The sample size for the training set

This is not applicable. There is no "training set" for a physical medical device like an infusion set. Training sets are relevant for machine learning algorithms.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established

This is not applicable for the same reasons as point 8.

Ask a specific question about this device