Search Results

The Slit Lamp SL-D301 is an AC-powered slitlamp biomicroscope intended for use in eye examination of the anterior eye segment, from the cornea epithelium to the posterior capsule. It is used to aid in the diagnosis of diseases or trauma which affect the structural properties of the anterior eye segment.

This instrument is a slit lamp to observe, examine and photograph the eyeball and appendage of the eye. The slit lamp has the illumination unit for illumination and the binocular stereo microscope, and allows for stereoscopic observation. This instrument allows users to photograph and save the observed images by combining with an accessory, the digital camera unit DC-4. This instrument consists of the main body and accessories.

The document is a 510(k) summary for the Topcon Slit Lamp SL-D301, which is an AC-powered slitlamp biomicroscope.

Here's an analysis of the provided text in relation to your request:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance

The document does not provide a table with specific acceptance criteria (e.g., numerical thresholds for performance metrics) or directly compare the device performance against such criteria in a quantitative manner. Instead, it states that the device was found to be "substantially equivalent" to a predicate device based on its intended use, indications for use, and similar technological characteristics, and compliance with recognized consensus standards.

The closest to "acceptance criteria" and "reported device performance" are statements of compliance with standards:

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)

The document explicitly states "The following bench testing was conducted...". This indicates that the study primarily involved laboratory-based evaluations against engineering and safety standards, rather than clinical studies using patient data. Therefore, concepts like "sample size for the test set" or "data provenance (country of origin, retrospective/prospective)" in the context of patient data do not apply here.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g. radiologist with 10 years of experience)

Given that the study was bench testing for compliance with technical standards, there were no "experts" in the sense of clinical specialists establishing ground truth on patient data. The "ground truth" was defined by the requirements of the recognized consensus standards themselves.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set

Not applicable, as this was bench testing against technical standards, not a clinical study requiring adjudication of expert interpretations.

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

No such study was performed or mentioned. This device is a Slit Lamp, a diagnostic instrument for direct observation by clinicians, and does not involve AI or human-in-the-loop assistance in the diagnostic aid sense that would warrant an MRMC study.

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

Not applicable. The device is a physical instrument for observation. It does not perform an "algorithm only" task in the absence of a human operator.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert concensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)

The "ground truth" in this context refers to the requirements and specifications set forth in the recognized consensus standards (e.g., IEC 60601-1, ISO 10939, etc.). The device was tested to ensure it met these predetermined engineering and safety specifications.

8. The sample size for the training set

Not applicable. This device does not use machine learning or AI that would require a training set.

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

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

Ask a specific question about this device