首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Indian Heart Journal >FDA CE mark or something else?—Thinking fast and slow
【2h】

FDA CE mark or something else?—Thinking fast and slow

机译:FDACE标志还是其他??

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

There is a robust debate going on among the Medical Device stake-holders whether FDA is better or CE mark or something else. Currently process of obtaining an FDA approval is bogged down by ever-increasing unpredictability, inconsistency, prolonged time, and huge expense but CE mark has its own problems. Historically, the Japanese review process has tended to be the slowest among the big three but recently with the introduction of accelerated review process there has been a significant progress. While the goal of an innovator/manufacturer is to develop, manufacture and market a medical device that addresses an unmet clinical need, the requisite regulatory approval process can be very confusing. Not only there is a whole lot of jargon tossed around by regulatory affair professionals: “substantial equivalence,” “PMDA,” “CE mark,” “Notified body,” “510K” and “PMA” but the actual approval process can also be very tardy, inconsistent and expensive.
机译:医疗器械的利益相关者之间是否存在激烈的辩论,究竟是FDA更好还是CE认证或其他。当前,由于越来越多的不可预测性,不一致,延长的时间和巨大的费用,使获得FDA批准的过程陷入了困境,但是CE标志有其自身的问题。从历史上看,日本的审查程序往往是三巨头中最慢的,但最近随着加速审查程序的引入,取得了重大进展。尽管创新者/制造商的目标是开发,制造和销售可满足未满足的临床需求的医疗设备,但必要的监管批准程序可能会非常令人困惑。监管事务专业人士不仅会扔很多术语:“相当的等效性”,“ PMDA”,“ CE标志”,“公告机构”,“ 510K”和“ PMA”,而且实际批准过程也可以非常迟钝,不一致且昂贵。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号