Search Results

The QuickVue Advance pH and Amines gll test contains two colorimetric tests intended for the qualitative detection of elevated vaginal fluid pH (pH ≥ 4.7) and the presence of volatile vaginal fluid amines. The test is intended for use by health care professionals as an aid in the diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis.

The QuickVue Advance pH and Amines gll test contains two qualitative, colorimetric tests for use in the characterization of a vaginal fluid sample: (1) a pH test that differentiates vaqinal fluid pH < 4.7 from vaginal fluid pH > 4.7; and (2) a test that detects alkali volatilizable amines in vaginal fluid. The test is intended for use by health care professionals as an aid in the diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the QuickVue® Advance pH and Amines gll test, based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: The exact number of patients/samples in the multi-center field clinical study is not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Data Provenance:
  • Country of Origin: The Physicians' Office Laboratory studies were conducted at three geographically distinct sites in the United States. The country of origin for the multi-center field clinical study is not explicitly stated but is implicitly within the scope of a U.S. regulatory submission.
  • Retrospective or Prospective: The text describes a "multi-center field clinical study" and "Physicians' Office Laboratory studies." This phrasing strongly suggests these were prospective studies, where the device was used on new samples/patients during the study period.

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

• Number of Experts: Not explicitly stated.
• Qualifications of Experts: Not explicitly stated. The ground truth was established by "Amsel criteria with resolution by Gram stain." This implies that the interpretation of Amsel criteria and Gram stains would have been performed by qualified medical professionals (e.g., clinicians, laboratory technologists/microbiologists), but their specific number, roles, or years of experience are not mentioned.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• The text mentions "resolution by Gram stain" in conjunction with Amsel criteria for establishing the ground truth. This indicates a form of adjudication, where Gram stain results were used to resolve or confirm diagnoses based on Amsel criteria. However, the specific method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, etc., for multiple readers) is not detailed. It implies a reference standard (Gram stain) was used to confirm or adjudicate initial clinical assessments.

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study

• No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study is not explicitly mentioned or described. The studies focused on the standalone performance of the device and its usability by office personnel, rather than comparing human reader performance with and without AI assistance. The device itself is a qualitative rapid test, not an AI interpretation tool.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Study

• Yes, the primary clinical validation appears to be a standalone study of the device. The text describes the device's performance in diagnosing BV based on its pH and amines tests, with sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy calculated relative to the Amsel criteria and Gram stain. The Physicians' Office Laboratory studies assessed the ability of personnel to perform the test accurately, but the core performance metrics are for the device's results themselves. The device produces a visual color change which is then interpreted by a human user, meaning it's a "human-in-the-loop" device in terms of interpretation, but the "algorithm" is the biochemical reaction itself. The studies, however, evaluate the performance of this reaction and its subsequent visual readout.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

• Expert Consensus + Pathology (or a related clinical standard): The ground truth was established based on "Amsel criteria with resolution by Gram stain."
  • Amsel Criteria: These are clinical criteria for diagnosing bacterial vaginosis, which are based on clinical signs and symptoms. This could be considered a form of clinical expert consensus in a diagnostic setting.
  • Gram Stain: This is a laboratory diagnostic method that involves microscopic examination of a vaginal fluid smear, often considered a "gold standard" or a very strong reference standard for BV diagnosis in many contexts. It's a form of pathology/microbiology result.
  • Therefore, the ground truth is a combination of established clinical criteria and a robust laboratory reference method, with the Gram stain serving to "resolve" or confirm diagnoses.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

• Not specified. The provided text describes validation and clinical studies but does not mention any "training set" or explicit machine learning model development. This device is a rapid diagnostic test based on chemical reactions and visual color changes, not a software-based AI algorithm that would typically require a training set in the modern sense.

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

• N/A. As this is not an AI/machine learning device with an explicit "training set," this question is not applicable. The device's underlying principles are chemical indicators. Performance parameters were validated through the clinical studies described, not by training a model.

Ask a specific question about this device