Search Results

The Redi-Test Methamphetamine is a qualitative, one step immunochromatographic competitive assay used to screen human urine for the presence of d, methamphetamine at a cutoff concentration of 1000ng/mL. The test is qualitative and provides only a preliminary analytical result, which must be confirmed by an alternate methodology preferably, GC/MS.

The Redi-Test Methamphelamine is an immunochromatographic based one step in vitro lest.

The provided text describes a 510(k) summary for the "Redi-Test Methamphetamine" device, comparing it to a predicate device, the "DRI Amphetamine Enzyme Immunoassay." The study is a comparative one to demonstrate substantial equivalence, rather than a standalone performance study against a predefined acceptance criterion.

Here's the information broken down:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria are implied by the comparison to the predicate device and the desired level of agreement. The study does not explicitly state pre-defined acceptance criteria in terms of sensitivity or specificity independently. Instead, it aims for substantial equivalence, which is demonstrated by a high agreement percentage with the predicate device.

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

• Sample Size: 102 specimens
  • 45 negative for methamphetamine
  • 57 positive for methamphetamine
• Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective). However, the study involves "specimens" which typically refers to real-world samples, but the collection method (retrospective or prospective) is not defined.

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

Not applicable. The ground truth for the discrepancies appears to have been established using an alternate methodology, GC/MS (Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry), which is a gold standard for confirming drug presence and concentration. This does not involve human experts in the sense of adjudication for interpretation, but rather a definitive analytical test.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable. The "adjudication" for discrepant samples was performed by an objective analytical method (GC/MS), rather than human expert consensus.

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 applicable. This study is for an in-vitro diagnostic (IVD) device (a chemical test kit) and does not involve human readers or AI in its diagnostic process.

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

Yes, in a way, the study evaluates the "standalone" performance of the Redi-Test Methamphetamine device by comparing its results directly to another IVD device (DRI Amphetamine Enzyme Immunoassay) and then using GC/MS for validation of discrepant results. It's a "device-only" performance assessment.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• For demonstrating substantial equivalence: The predicate device, the "DRI Amphetamine Enzyme Immunoassay," served as a primary reference for comparison.
• For resolving discrepancies/validation: GC/MS (Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry) was used as the definitive analytical method to determine the actual methamphetamine levels in discrepant samples.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable. This is an immunochromatographic test kit, which is a chemical assay, not a machine learning or AI-based device that requires a training set. The device itself is "trained" during its manufacturing and quality control processes.

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

Not applicable, as there is no "training set" in the context of an AI/ML algorithm. The performance characteristics are inherent to the chemistry and design of the immunochromatographic assay.

Ask a specific question about this device