Search Results

The Unsaturated Iron Binding Capacity (UIBC) assay is intended to measure the unsaturated iron-binding capacity in serum. Iron-binding capacity measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of anemia.

Unsaturated Iron Binding Capacity (UIBC) is an in vitro diagnostic assay for the quantitative determination of the unsaturated iron binding capacity of human serum. The UIBC assay is a clinical chemistry assay in which transferrin is saturated by adding a known excess quantity of iron. The free Fe2+ reacts with Nitroso-PSAP forming a chelate compound. The color measured at 760 nm is proportional to the residual iron concentration. Unsaturated iron binding capacity is calculated by taking the iron concentration from a known excess quantity of iron.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the UIBC device, based on the provided text:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

There are no explicitly stated acceptance criteria with numerical targets. Instead, the acceptance is based on demonstrating "substantial equivalence" to a predicate device. The performance characteristics of the new UIBC assay are compared to the Boehringer Mannheim UIBC assay on the Hitachi 717 Analyzer.

Study Details

The study conducted is a comparative performance study to demonstrate substantial equivalence of the new UIBC assay to a predicate device.

1. Sample sizes used for the test set and data provenance:

   • The document does not specify the sample size used for the comparative performance study (method comparison) or the precision studies.
   • The data provenance is not explicitly stated (e.g., country of origin). However, given it's an in vitro diagnostic assay, the samples would likely be human serum. The study is prospective in the sense that it involves testing the new device and comparing its performance to an existing one.

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

   • This is an in vitro diagnostic assay, not an imaging or diagnostic AI device that typically relies on expert interpretation for ground truth.
   • The "ground truth" for this type of assay is the result obtained from the predicate device (Boehringer Mannheim UIBC assay on the Hitachi 717 Analyzer). There were no human experts establishing ground truth in the traditional sense for the test set samples.

3. Adjudication method for the test set:

   • Not applicable as the "ground truth" is established by the predicate device's measurement, not by expert consensus requiring adjudication.

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, a MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This is an in vitro diagnostic assay, not a device involving human readers or AI assistance in interpretation.

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

   • This entire study effectively evaluates "standalone" performance, as it's an automated chemical assay. The UIBC assay measures the concentration of unsaturated iron binding capacity (UIBC) in human serum without human interpretation loops impacting the measurement itself.

6. The type of ground truth used:

   • For the comparative performance study, the "ground truth" was the results obtained from the predicate device (Boehringer Mannheim UIBC assay on the Hitachi 717 Analyzer).
   • For the precision studies, the "ground truth" was based on control material of known concentrations.

7. The sample size for the training set:

   • The document does not mention a "training set" in the context of machine learning. This device is an in vitro diagnostic assay based on chemical reactions, not an AI/ML algorithm that requires training data.

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

   • Not applicable, as there is no "training set" for an AI/ML algorithm.

Ask a specific question about this device