Search Results

For the prevention of chronic tension and temporal mandibular joint syndrome that is r of the provenion of the posterior mandibular and maxillary teeth by the temporalis muscle. The device is custom made for the individual.

The device is custom made for the individual.

The provided text contains information about an FDA 510(k) clearance for a device called the "NTI Clenching Suppression System." However, it does not include details about acceptance criteria, specific study designs, performance metrics, sample sizes for training or test sets, expert qualifications, or ground truth methodologies that are typically found in a study report. The document is an FDA clearance letter, which confirms substantial equivalence to a predicate device, but doesn't elaborate on the underlying studies in the requested format.

Therefore, most of the requested information cannot be extracted from this document.

Here's what can be stated based on the provided text:

• Device Name: NTI Clenching Suppression System
• Regulatory Status: Unclassified, 510(k) clearance (K981546)
• Indication For Use: "For the prevention of chronic tension and temporal mandibular joint syndrome that is r of the provenion of the posterior mandibular and maxillary teeth by the temporalis muscle. The device is custom made for the individual."

The following information is NOT available in the provided text:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: This document is an FDA clearance letter, not a study report. It states substantial equivalence but does not provide specific performance metrics or acceptance criteria.
2. Sample sizes used for the test set and the data provenance: Not mentioned.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not mentioned.
4. Adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set: Not mentioned.
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: Not mentioned. The device is a "Clenching Suppression System," suggesting a physical medical device, not an AI/software device that would involve human readers or AI assistance in interpretation.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable, as this is a physical device, not an algorithm.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.): Not mentioned.
8. The sample size for the training set: Not mentioned.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not mentioned.

In summary, the provided document does not contain the detailed study information required to answer most of your questions. It is a regulatory clearance letter, not a scientific study publication or summary.

Ask a specific question about this device