Search Results

The equipment is intended to obtain position emission tomography (PET) images of parts of the fit in the patient aperture (e.g. head or breast) to detect abnormal pattern of distribution of a positron emitting radiopharmaceutical. This information can assist in diagnosis, therapeutic outcome assessment.

The SET-5002 PET scanner is designed to image the patient's breast or head which is placed in the aperture provided. The scanner can be easily switched from head to breast mode and back again with the push of a button on the control panel. When positrons are emitted from the radioactive drug administered to the patient, they annihilate electrons in body tissue. That process emits two annihilation photons (hereinafter "gamma rays") with an energy of 511 keV in the 180-degree direction. The PET System collects data by simultaneously counting both of these gamma rays using detectors arranged in a circular configuration. After collecting data for the specified scan time, an image is then reconstructed from that data based on the quantitative distribution of the radioactive drug. The following corrections are necessary for obtaining a quantitative distribution image: Normalization, Attenuation Correction, Scatter Correction, Random Correction, Decay Correction, Standard Time Correction, Count Losses Correction, and Cross Calibration. Operation of the system requires trained persons. The system is designed to be operated in a controlled medical environment such as a hospital or clinic. The unit is supplied with a computer which acquires and stores patient images. The scintillator type is Lutetium. The detectors are SiPM (Silicon photomultipliers).

The provided text describes the Shimadzu SET-5002 PET scanner and its premarket notification to the FDA. While it mentions performance testing and a clinical reader study, the document does not provide explicit acceptance criteria in a quantitative format, nor does it detail a comparative effectiveness study (MRMC) with human readers or a standalone AI performance study.

The information primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device (BBX-PET Scanner K210450) based on technological characteristics and general performance metrics, rather than specific acceptance criteria for a new AI/software component within the device.

However, based on the available information, I can infer and reconstruct some aspects relevant to performance validation as described:

Derived Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance (Inferred):

Since no explicit quantitative acceptance criteria for image quality or diagnostic accuracy are listed, the "acceptance" is implied by the study's conclusion: "acceptable diagnostic results" and "supports the determination of substantial equivalence."

Study Details based on the provided text:

1. Sample Size and Data Provenance:

   • Test Set Sample Size: 18 images (12 brain images and 6 breast images).
   • Data Provenance: U.S. clinical site. The document states, "A clinical reader study using the SET-5002 was conducted at U.S. clinical site." The retrospective or prospective nature is not explicitly mentioned but typically clinical reader studies for regulatory submission are on retrospectively collected and de-identified data.

2. Number of Experts and Qualifications:

   • Number of Experts: One (singular "radiologist" and "reader attested").
   • Qualifications: "Board certified radiologist." Specific years of experience are not mentioned.

3. Adjudication Method:

   • Method: None specified in the document. The study was conducted with a single board-certified radiologist reviewing the images.

4. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study:

   • Was it done?: No. The study described is a single-reader study rather than a multi-reader, multi-case comparative effectiveness study.
   • Effect Size: Not applicable, as no MRMC study was conducted comparing human readers with and without AI assistance. The study assessed "overall image quality... demonstrated acceptable diagnostic results" rather than an improvement metric for human readers.

5. Standalone (Algorithm Only) Performance Study:

   • Was it done?: No. The described "clinical reader study" involved a human radiologist reviewing images produced by the SET-5002. There is no mention of an AI algorithm within the SET-5002 that would have standalone performance measured independent of human interpretation. The SET-5002 is a PET imaging system, not an AI diagnostic software.

6. Type of Ground Truth Used:

   • Type: The ground truth for the reader study appears to be the assessment by the board-certified radiologist herself regarding "acceptable diagnostic results" and "PET imaging findings related to the progression of dementia, tumor detection, and the extent of spread." It's not stated that the images were confirmed against a definitive ground truth like pathology or long-term clinical outcomes. It implies the radiologist's assessment of image quality for diagnostic purposes served as the "ground truth" for the device's performance in this context.

7. Training Set Sample Size:

   • Sample Size: Not applicable. The SET-5002 is described as an "Emission Computed Tomography System" (PET scanner), not an AI/machine learning software that requires a training set. The performance validation for such a device typically involves demonstrating image quality and physical performance metrics (resolution, sensitivity, etc.) and confirming suitability for diagnostic use by experts.

8. How Ground Truth for Training Set was Established:

   • Method: Not applicable, as there is no mention of a training set for an AI/ML algorithm within the device.

Ask a specific question about this device

The SETx Pedicle Screw System is intended to provide immobilization of spinal segments in sketally mature patients as an adjunct to fusion. The SETx Pedicle Screw System is intended for posterior, non-cervical pedicle fixation or anterolateral fixation for the following indications: degenerative disc disease (DDD) (defined as back pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies); curvatures (i.e., scoliosis, kyphosis, or lordosis); spondylolisthesis; trauma (i.e., fracture or dislocation); spinal stenosis; and failed previous fusion.

Not Found

This document is a 510(k) premarket notification decision letter for the SETx Pedicle Screw System. It declares that the device is substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices. This type of document does not contain information about acceptance criteria or specific study results proving the device meets those criteria.

The information you are requesting (acceptance criteria, performance data, sample sizes, expert qualifications, ground truth establishment, etc.) for an AI/software-as-a-medical-device (SaMD) study is typically found in:

• Clinical study reports: Detailed documents submitted to regulators describing the design, conduct, results, and analysis of clinical trials.
• 510(k) Summary: A public summary provided by the manufacturer outlining the key information about the device and its substantial equivalence claims, which sometimes includes a high-level summary of performance data, especially for AI/ML devices.
• PMA (Premarket Approval) applications: For higher-risk devices, these applications require more extensive clinical evidence and detail.
• Publications in peer-reviewed journals: Manufacturers may publish their study results.
• FDA Premarket Submissions (PMA/510k) databases: While limited, some information might be accessible.

Therefore, based solely on the provided text, I cannot answer your request. The document is a regulatory approval letter for a mechanical pedicle screw system, not an AI/ML diagnostic or therapeutic device. It pertains to spinal implants, not software performance.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Set Screw for Ti Trochanteric Fixation Nail (TFN) is intended to treat stable and unstable fractures of the proximal femur including pertrochanteric fractures, intertrochanteric fractures, basal neck fractures and combinations thereof. The long TFN is additionally indicated for subtrochanteric fractures, pertrochanteric fractures associated with shaft fractures, pathologic fractures (including prophylactic use) in both trochanteric and diaphyseal regions, long subtrochanteric fractures, proximal or distal non-unions, malunions, and revisions.

The Set Screw for Ti Trochanteric Fixation Nail (TFN) is an additional offering for use with the existing TFN System. The Set Screw prevents sliding and rotation of the head element (TFN Screw or helical blade) within the nail for fixation of proximal femur fractures.

The provided 510(k) summary (K120083) for the "Set Screw for Ti Trochanteric Fixation Nail (TFN)" describes a mechanical testing study to demonstrate substantial equivalence to predicate devices, rather than a clinical study evaluating diagnostic or prognostic performance. Therefore, many of the requested categories regarding clinical study design, expert evaluation, and ground truth are not applicable.

Here's an analysis based on the information provided:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

• Sample Size: Not specified for the mechanical testing. Mechanical tests typically use a certain number of samples, but the exact count is not mentioned in this summary.
• Data Provenance: The data is likely from in-vitro mechanical testing conducted by the manufacturer, Synthes. The summary does not specify a country of origin for the data beyond being part of the manufacturer's submission. It is prospective in the sense that the tests were designed and executed to support this 510(k) submission.

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

• Not Applicable. This was a mechanical performance study, not a study requiring expert clinical assessment for ground truth. The "ground truth" here is the objective measurement of mechanical properties, specifically "peak slip load," under controlled conditions.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Not Applicable. As a mechanical test, there is no human adjudication process involved. The results are based on physical measurements.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, and the Effect Size of How Much Human Readers Improve with AI vs. Without AI Assistance

• Not Applicable. This is a mechanical device study, not an AI-assisted diagnostic study involving human readers.

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

• Not Applicable. This is a mechanical device study, not an algorithm performance study.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• Mechanical Measurement (Peak Slip Load): The ground truth for this study was the objectively measured mechanical characteristic of "peak slip load" under specified test conditions.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Not Applicable. This is a mechanical device study, not a machine learning study requiring a training set. If referring to the development of the device itself, the summary does not provide details on R&D processes beyond the final mechanical testing.

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

• Not Applicable. As there is no training set in the context of this mechanical performance study, this question is not relevant.

Ask a specific question about this device

SET GRI-FILL 3.0 6 to 1 is a fluid transfer set to be used in conjunction with SETS GRI-FILL 3.0 1 WAY or 2 WAY through which the same substance from up to 6 rubberstoppered glass vials may be delivered into a final IV container.

SET GRI-FILL 3.0 6 TO 1 is an ancillary device used as a fluid pathway in conjunction with the Gri-fill 3.0 Pharmacy Compounder and associated 1 way or 2 way transfer sets through which the same substance from up to 6 rubber-stoppered glass vials may be delivered into a final IV container. Equipped with a spike on each line and a 0.2 µm hydrophobic air-filter, it minimizes the formation of aerosols when preparing / dispensing the source substances. Facilitates easy puncture of thick rubber stoppers of small diameter. Provides fast fluid addition and extraction due to the large surface area of the air-filter.

This device should not be used with lipids, suspensions or solutions that are incompatible with PVC with DEHP plasticizer. Substances that are known to show incompatibility include, but are not limited to, Paclitaxel, Docetaxel, Etoposide, Carmustine, Propofol, Nitroglycerin, Isosorbide Dinitrate and Diazepam. For information concerning compatibility of substances, please consult the information provided with the substance.

Fluid transfer set consisting of PVC tubing linking 6 minispikes to be used in conjunction with SETS GRI-FILL 3.0 1 Way or 2 Way transfer sets through which the same substance from up to 6 rubber-stoppered glass vials may be delivered into a final IV container. It is equipped with a 0.2 micron hydrophobic air-filter that minimizes the formation of aerosols when preparing and dispensing the source substances. The spike on each line facilitates easy puncture of thick rubber stoppers of small diameter. The device provides fast fluid addition and extraction due to the large surface area of the air-filter that quickly equalizes pressures.

This document, K093182, describes the SET GRI-FILL 3.0 6 to 1, a fluid transfer set. The information provided outlines the device's technical specifications and a summary of non-clinical data used to establish substantial equivalence to predicate devices, rather than a detailed study demonstrating quantitative performance against specific acceptance criteria. This submission focuses on comparing the new device against existing, legally marketed predicate devices (QUICKPIN and FLEBOSET MULTIPLE).

Here's an analysis 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

• Test Set Sample Size: Not explicitly stated. The document refers generally to "bench testing" and "functional laboratory bench testing" (Page 3). It does not provide specific numerical sample sizes for these tests.
• Data Provenance: The studies were non-clinical, functional laboratory bench tests. The submitter is Laboratorios Grifols, S.A. in Barcelona, Spain. The data is thus likely from retrospective internal testing performed by the manufacturer in Spain.

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

• This information is not provided. The evaluation relies on "functional laboratory bench testing" and "chemical and biological testing" rather than human expert interpretation of results. The ground truth for device performance would be established by the physical and chemical properties of the device itself and its interaction with fluids, as measured in a lab setting, not by human experts.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• An adjudication method is not applicable here as the "ground truth" is determined by objective physical and chemical testing, not by expert consensus on subjective interpretations.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, and Effect Size of Human Improvement

• No, a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not done. This is a medical device (fluid transfer set), not an imaging or diagnostic AI tool that would typically involve human readers.

6. If a Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Was Done

• This is not applicable as the device is a physical medical device, not a software algorithm. The "performance" refers to the device's physical function and material compatibility, which is inherently "standalone" in its operation.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• The ground truth used primarily involves the physical and chemical performance measurements of the device components and the assembled system in a laboratory setting. This includes:
  • Verification of fluid transfer functionality.
  • Measurement of aerosol minimization (implied by the 0.2 µm hydrophobic filter).
  • Assessment of spike puncturing capability.
  • Evaluation of fluid addition/extraction speed.
  • Chemical and biological compatibility testing of materials.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• This concept is not applicable here. This is a physical medical device, not a machine learning model that requires a training set.

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

• Not applicable, as there is no "training set" for a physical medical device.

Ask a specific question about this device

Ask a specific question about this device

Indirect cementation of ceramic, composite and metal inlays, onlays, crowns, bridges, posts, screws and veneers.

Not Found

I am sorry, but the provided text is a 510(k) clearance letter for a dental cement (trade name "seT"). It does not contain any information about acceptance criteria or a study that proves the device meets those criteria for an AI or medical device that would have such a study.

The document is a regulatory approval notice, confirming that the dental cement "seT" is substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device. This type of clearance does not typically involve the detailed performance studies or AI-specific evaluation metrics you've requested.

Therefore, I cannot extract the information regarding acceptance criteria, study details, sample sizes, expert qualifications, or ground truth establishment from this document.

Ask a specific question about this device

SETS GRI-FILL 3.0 1 WAY and 2 WAY fluid transfer sets are ancillary devices used in the GRI-FILL 3.0 pharmacy compounder in the hospital pharmacy to provide a fluid pathway through which one or two source substances are delivered into a final IV container or syringe.

SETS GRI-FILL 3.0 MULTIPLE fluid transfer sets are ancillary devices used as fluid pathways in conjunction with the GRI-FILL 3.0 pharmacy compounder and associated 1 WAY or 2 WAY transfer sets through which the same substance from up to 6 source containers may be delivered into a final IV container.

This device should not be used with lipids.

This device is intended to be used by trained health-care personnel. It is restricted to sale by or on the order of a physician.

SETS GRI-FILL 3.0 are fluid transfer sets for use with the GRI-FILL 3.0 pharmacy compounding device in order to compound or mix different multi-ingredient solutions and to channel them into a final suitable IV container. The set is a disposable component of the compounding device. The 1WAY / 2WAY models are made up of a syringe, a distributor, tubing to channel the fluid and a waste/residue bag. Sets are available for 1 or 2 source substances. Also a Luer female - female adapter is available as an accessory to the 1 or 2 way transfer sets. The MULTIPLE model is also used as an accessory with the 1WAY / 2WAY sets for channeling the same solution from up to six (6) source containers delivering them into a final IV container. It is made up of connectors and tubing to enable interconnection of the different source containers.

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the acceptance criteria and study for the SETS GRI-FILL 3.0 device:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance Study for SETS GRI-FILL 3.0

The provided text focuses on establishing substantial equivalence for the SETS GRI-FILL 3.0 with predicate devices, rather than presenting a detailed clinical study with specific acceptance criteria and performance metrics for a novel medical diagnostic algorithm. The information pertains to fluid transfer sets used in pharmacy compounding.

Based on the document, the "acceptance criteria" can be inferred from the comparison with predicate devices and the functional testing performed. The device's "performance" is reported qualitatively as demonstrating "correct operation" and meeting "applicable requirements."

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Given the nature of the device (fluid transfer sets) and the documentation provided (510(k) summary for substantial equivalence), the "acceptance criteria" are primarily related to functional and material specifications that ensure safe and effective fluid transfer, consistent with predicate devices.

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

The document does not detail a specific "test set" in the context of a typical AI/algorithm study (e.g., patient data). The testing described is functional laboratory testing of the device itself.

• Sample Size: Not specified in terms of number of devices or number of test runs, but it's implied that sufficient testing was done to ensure "correct operation."
• Data Provenance: The "study" (functional laboratory testing) was conducted by Laboratorios Grifols, S.A. (Spain). The data is retrospective in the sense that the results are being presented after the tests were concluded.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth and Qualifications

• Number of Experts: Not applicable. The ground truth for this type of device (fluid transfer set) is established through engineering and functional testing against predefined specifications and industry standards, not expert consensus on diagnostic images or clinical outcomes.
• Qualifications of Experts: N/A. The "experts" would be the engineers and technicians involved in the design, manufacturing, and testing of the device.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Adjudication Method: Not applicable in the traditional sense of clinical studies requiring expert review. The "adjudication" is inherent in the laboratory testing, where results are compared against pre-defined engineering and performance specifications.

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

• MRMC Study Done: No. This device is not an AI diagnostic tool that would typically involve human readers.

6. Standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the loop performance) Study

• Standalone Study Done: Yes, in the sense that the device's functional performance was evaluated independently without human intervention during the fluid transfer process itself (though humans operate the compounding system). The "algorithm" here is the physical design and manufacturing of the transfer set, and its performance was assessed directly.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

• Type of Ground Truth: Engineering specifications and performance standards. The device's functionality (accurate fluid delivery, no leakage, sterility, material compatibility) serves as its own "ground truth" when tested against these established criteria.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

• Sample Size for Training Set: Not applicable. This device is not an AI or machine learning algorithm. There is no "training set" in the context of developing an intelligent system. The design and manufacturing process would involve iterative testing, but not a formal "training set" as understood in AI.

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

• How Ground Truth for Training Set Was Established: Not applicable, as there is no training set for an algorithm. The "ground truth" for the device's design and manufacturing is derived from industry standards, regulatory requirements, and the intended function of a fluid transfer system in pharmacy compounding.

Ask a specific question about this device

All models of SETS GRI-FILL 2.0 fluid transfer sets are ancillary devices used in conjunction with the GRI-FILL 2.0 pharmacy compounding device in hospites in hospites for a macy to provide a fluid pathway through which one or more source solutions are delivered into a single Gri-bag or Gri-flex container or into a standard syringe or pump. The device should not be used with lipids. It is restricted to sale by or on order of a physician.

SETS GRI-FILL 2.0 are fluid transfer sets for use with the GRI-FILL 2.0 pharmacy compounding device in order tc compound or mix different multi-ingredient solutions and to channel them into a final suitable container. The set is a disposable component of the compounding device made up of a syringe, a distributor and tubing to channel the fluid. Sets are available for 1 or 2 source solutions. Also a Luer female - female adapter is available as an accessory to the 1 or 2 way transfer sets. The model Luer Connection Tube can be joined to the 1 way or 2 ways sets as prolongation for connection to source solution containers with luer terminals.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study information for the SETS GRI-FILL 2.0 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

The document does not explicitly state a specific "sample size" for the test set in terms of number of devices or number of tests conducted for each functional parameter. It broadly mentions "Functional laboratory testing performed in foreseeable operating conditions." The data provenance is not explicitly mentioned as country of origin, but the submission is from Laboratorios Grifols, S.A. in Spain. The study appears to be prospective as it's a submission for premarket notification, indicating the tests were conducted for the purpose of demonstrating substantial equivalence.

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

The document does not mention the use of experts to establish ground truth for a "test set" in the context of clinical or diagnostic performance. The evaluation is focused on the device's functional integrity and material compatibility, which would typically be assessed through engineering and laboratory testing rather than expert-derived ground truth.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable. This is not a study requiring adjudication of expert opinions or interpretations.

5. If a Multi Reader Multi Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study was done

No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This device is an I.V. fluid transfer set, and its evaluation focuses on functional and material equivalence, not diagnostic or clinical accuracy requiring human interpretation of cases.

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

Yes, the evaluation described is essentially a standalone (algorithm only, if "algorithm" refers to the device's inherent design and function) performance assessment. The device itself performs the function of fluid transfer, and its performance was evaluated in this standalone capacity through laboratory functional testing. There is no human-in-the-loop component in the performance of the device itself (though human operators operate the compounding device with which it is used).

7. The type of ground truth used

The "ground truth" for this device's evaluation is based on engineering specifications, material compatibility standards (chemical and biological testing), and functional performance criteria (e.g., accurate fluid delivery, no leakage). It is not based on expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data in the clinical sense, as the device's function is mechanical fluid transfer.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable. This is not a machine learning or AI-driven device with a "training set." The evaluation is based on the physical and functional properties of the manufactured device.

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

Not applicable, as there is no training set for this device.

Ask a specific question about this device

The SetPoint® Endovascular Temperature Probe is indicated for use with the SetPoint Endovascular Temperature Management System to measure core body temperature.

The SetPoint Endovascular Temperature Probe consists of a sheath containing two 400-series equivalent thermistors on separate and independent circuits. This Probe is intended for endovascular placement similar to other venous catheters with temperature measurement capability, including the Arrow International Inc. Multi-Lumen Central Venous Catheter (K904404). The outer sheath is Pebax and has a soft, straight Pebax tip. The Endovascular Probe is heparin-coated for hemocompatibility. It is compatible with a 4 Fr. introducer with Touhy-Borst hemostasis valve. The intended use is to measure a patient's core body temperature via venous blood temperature. The Endovascular Probe is for single use only. It is provided sterile and packaged in a polyethylene/Tyvek pouch. Sterilization is by gamma irradiation.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the Radiant Medical SetPoint Endovascular Temperature Probe based on the provided document:

This document is a 510(k) summary, which typically focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device rather than comprehensive de novo clinical outcome studies. Therefore, the information regarding in-depth clinical studies, expert-based ground truth, and specific acceptance criteria as might be seen for AI/ML devices, is limited.

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

Note: The document states the device "performs with similar safety and effectiveness" to predicate devices, but it does not define explicit numerical acceptance criteria or provide specific numerical results for the probe's temperature measurement accuracy, precision, or other performance characteristics.

1. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance

• Sample Size: Not explicitly stated for specific performance tests. The document mentions tests for functionality and biocompatibility, but not the number of probes or samples used in these tests.
• Data Provenance: Not specified (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective). These were likely bench and lab tests, not human subject clinical trials with specific patient data provenance.

2. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts

• This type of information is not applicable to the regulatory submission for this device. The tests mentioned (functionality, biocompatibility, electrical safety) are typically engineering and laboratory-based assessments, not dependent on expert consensus or clinical interpretation for ground truth.

3. Adjudication method for the test set

• Not applicable. As the tests described are engineering and laboratory tests, an adjudication method as would be applied to subjective clinical assessments is not relevant.

4. 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

• No. This is not an AI/ML device, and no MRMC comparative effectiveness study was performed or described. This type of study is specifically for evaluating the impact of AI on human interpretation.

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

• No. This is a hardware device (temperature probe), not an algorithm. Standalone performance as defined for AI algorithms is not applicable.

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

• The ground truth for functionality would have been established by reference standards or highly accurate calibrated measurement devices (e.g., a known temperature bath for temperature accuracy, or standard test blocks for mechanical properties).
• For biocompatibility, the ground truth is established by adherence to ISO 10993 standards and their specified chemical/biological assays, rather than expert consensus on clinical images or pathology.

7. The sample size for the training set

• Not applicable. This is a traditional medical device (temperature probe) and does not involve AI/ML algorithms or a "training set" in the context of machine learning.

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

• Not applicable. As there is no training set for an AI/ML algorithm, this question is not relevant.

Ask a specific question about this device

Bayer SETpoint Calibrator is intended for in vitro diagnostic use to calibrate the following systems: Technicon RA and opeRA Chemistry Systems, Technicon RA-100, Technicon DAX, ADVIA 1650/ADVIA 2400 Chemistry systems, and ADVIA IMS Chemistry systems.

The SETpoint Chemistry Calibrator is a bovine serum based solution containing various nonhuman constituents at defined concentrations.

The provided text describes the Bayer Healthcare SETpoint Chemistry Calibrator. It is a calibrator for multiple analytes intended for in vitro diagnostic use to calibrate various Technicon and ADVIA Chemistry systems.

Here's an analysis based on your request:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The submission does not explicitly define "acceptance criteria" in a quantitative manner (e.g., specific thresholds for performance metrics). Instead, it states that the device's performance is "similar to other products in commercial distribution intended for similar use" and validates stability according to Bayer procedures. The primary performance characteristic discussed is stability.

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

The document states, "The stability of the SETpoint calibrator values has been validated according to Bayer procedures and is based on the results of three separate lots of calibrator material."

• Sample Size for Test Set: Three separate lots of calibrator material.
• Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated, but assumed to be internal testing conducted by Bayer Healthcare Diagnostics Division. The data is prospective, as it involves the testing of the newly developed lots.

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

This type of information is typically not applicable to calibrator performance studies. The "ground truth" for a calibrator's performance lies in its ability to consistently produce accurate and stable values for the analytes it is designed to measure. This is assessed through analytical methods and comparisons to established reference standards, not through consensus of human experts.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable. Statistical or analytical methods are used to determine stability and performance, not human adjudication.

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 is a calibrator device, not an AI-powered diagnostic tool that involves human readers interpreting cases.

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

This information is not directly applicable in the terms of an "algorithm only" study, as this is a physical calibrator product. However, the stability validation of the calibrator itself can be considered a standalone performance assessment. The document states: "The stability of the SETpoint calibrator values has been validated according to Bayer procedures..." This indicates that the performance of the calibrator material itself was evaluated independently to ensure it met internal specifications for stability.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth for the performance of a chemical calibrator is established by:

• Reference Standards: The manufacturer uses highly accurate reference methods and/or certified reference materials to assign target values to the analytes within the calibrator.
• Analytical Methods: The stability and accuracy of the calibrator's assigned values are verified through a series of analytical tests over time and under various conditions to ensure they remain within acceptable specifications.

In this document, the "ground truth" for stability is established by Bayer's internal procedures and validated against those procedures, which would involve comparison to expected values or reference standards for the analytes.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable. This is not an AI/machine learning device that requires a training set. The "training" for a calibrator happens during its manufacturing process to ensure proper formulation and assigned values, rather than through data input.

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 algorithm. The quality and "ground truth" of a calibrator are established through manufacturing, quality control, and testing against recognized analytical standards, as mentioned in point 7.

Ask a specific question about this device