Search Results

This sunlamp product is intended exclusively for aesthetic tanning of the human skin, for one person at a time, at the age of 18 or above.

The primary technical components of sunlamp products are artificial sources of UV radiation as well as a mechanical structure with a defined active surface. UV lamps emit different UV-A and UV-B proportions of the UV radiation. The UV-A proportion primarily generates a superficial tan, which appears rapidly and is intensive but also fades more rapidly. The UV-B radiation is primarily responsible for more long-term tanning results. Using traditional UV light with the combination of red and blue light the user indulges in a new luxurious tanning experience. Optimal tanning results are achieved due to the synergistic combination of light spectra.

The provided text is a 510(k) Summary of Safety and Effectiveness for sunlamp products. It details comparisons between proposed devices and legally marketed predicate devices to demonstrate substantial equivalence, rather than providing an acceptance criteria table and a study proving a device meets those criteria in the context of an AI/algorithm-driven medical device.

The document does not contain information relevant to AI/algorithm performance, ground truth establishment, sample sizes for training/test sets, or expert review processes for such devices. Therefore, I cannot generate the requested table and study description based on the provided text.

The text focuses on hardware comparison and compliance with established performance standards for sunlamp products (e.g., IEC 60601-1 for electrical and mechanical safety, IEC 60601-1-2 for EMC, and U.S. performance standard 21CFR 1040.20 for irradiance ratio).

To summarize why I cannot fulfill your request:

• No AI/Algorithm Component: The submitted document describes sunlamp products, which are physical devices. There is no mention of any AI component, algorithm, or software that would require performance evaluation metrics like sensitivity, specificity, or AUC, nor would it involve concepts like "ground truth" derived from expert consensus or pathology for diagnostic purposes.
• Performance Testing Focus: The "Summary of performance testing" section clearly states that the devices were tested for "biocompatibility," "electrical and mechanical safety," and "EMC," and compliance with "U.S. performance standard 21CFR 1040.20" (which pertains to sunlamp products and their UV emissions). These are physical device performance criteria, not AI/algorithm performance.
• Comparative Approach: The entire document is structured as a comparison (substantial equivalence) to predicate devices, demonstrating that new models are similar in technology, intended use, and safety to already cleared devices, rather than a novel device proving its effectiveness against a set of performance criteria through a clinical study.

Therefore, the requested information (Acceptance Criteria Table, Sample Sizes for Test/Training, Expert Ground Truth, Adjudication, MRMC study, Standalone performance, Type of Ground Truth, Training Set Size, Training Ground Truth) is not present in the provided document because it describes a different type of medical device lacking an AI/algorithm component.

Ask a specific question about this device