Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K973886
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    1997-11-04

    (21 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    874.3300
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    N/A
    Why did this record match?
    Device Name :

    OTICON DIGISOUND COMPACT

    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    A. General Indications: The indication for use of the air conduction hearing aids in this Submission is to amplify sound for individuals with impaired ability. These devices are indicated for individuals with losses in the following category(ies). (Check appropriate space(s)): Severity: 1. Slight ✓ 2. Mild ✓ 3. Moderate ✓ 4. Severe ✓ 5. Profound Configuration: 1. High Frequency - Precipitously Sloping ✓ 2. Gradually Sloping ✓ 3. Reverse Slope ✓ 4. Flat ✓ 5. Other Other 1. Low tolerance To Loudness ✓ 2. 3. B. Specific Indications (Only if appropriate.): (Most psychoacoustic indications such as improved speech intelligibility in background noise, must be supported by clinical data.) 1. To amplify and deliver sound to the ear via air conduction 2. 3.

    Device Description

    Not Found

    AI/ML Overview

    I'm sorry, but I cannot fulfill your request to describe the acceptance criteria and the study proving a device meets these criteria based on the provided text. The documents you've supplied are an FDA 510(k) clearance letter and an "Indications For Use" statement for the "Oticon DigiSound Compact" hearing aid from 1997.

    These documents do not contain the detailed information you've requested, such as:

    • A table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance.
    • Sample sizes for test sets, data provenance, or the number and qualifications of experts for ground truth.
    • Adjudication methods.
    • Multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study details, including effect size.
    • Standalone algorithm performance.
    • Type of ground truth used (pathology, outcomes, etc.).
    • Sample size for training sets or how ground truth for training was established.

    The FDA 510(k) clearance process, especially in 1997, for a hearing aid of this nature, primarily focused on substantial equivalence to existing predicate devices. This means the manufacturer demonstrated that their device was as safe and effective as a legally marketed device, often through engineering and performance testing rather than extensive clinical efficacy studies with the types of details you're asking for in the context of AI/ML performance.

    The provided text only confirms that the device was found substantially equivalent and lists its general and specific indications for use, primarily relating to types and severities of hearing loss.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1