This session is presented from the point of view of seasoned MDR-compliant CER medical writers. In this 45-minute live Q&A, we will answer questions regarding critical concepts for a clinical evaluation report template such as safety and performance objectives, clinical outcomes, clinical benefits, acceptance criteria, and risk-benefit ratio. We hope to provide you with best practices and writing strategies to support solid planning during your own writing process.
During this session, come prepared with your questions for our experts to answer. Please submit your questions ahead of time while registering for this session so we have ample time to answer them thoughtfully. Also, please be aware that answers will be limited to 3 minutes per question.
This forum will answer questions on a first come first serve basis, so please submit all your questions when you register for this event.
Click here to watch the recording of this session.
Those Regulatory, Quality and Clinical leaders and teams who develop, write, review, or approve clinical evaluation reports for MDR submissions or performance evaluation reports for IVDR submissions.
Are you looking for best tips on how to create a robust systematic literature review process? And maybe even an informative case study illustrating the process? Watch our webinar on effective systematic literature review for post-market surveillance to understand how to continually support your device once your clinical evaluation report is completed and submitted. Learn how leveraging published data can help meet regulatory expectations and inform internal decision-making, the steps for conducting a methodologically-sound SLR, and even how data obtained through SLR can empower the successful execution of post-market surveillance activities, drive efficiencies, and support regulatory compliance.
Do you know how to identify meaningful safety and performance endpoints (measures/objectives)? Are you confidently able to demonstrate that your safety and performance objectives are appropriate and clinically relevant?
Download our free white paper, a companion piece to our popular webinar where we cover strategies to verify device safety and performance in the clinical evaluation of medical and in vitro diagnostic (IVDs) devices. This white paper should help you with identifying meaningful safety and performance measures for clinical or performance evaluation. It will also help with defining acceptance criteria parameters to determine the acceptability of benefit-risk as mandated by Medical Device Regulation (MDR) 2017/745 and In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR) 2017/746.
Safety and performance objectives…..clinical outcomes…..clinical benefits…..acceptance criteria…..risk-benefit ratio. These terms represent key concepts of the Clinical Evaluation Report (CER), yet confusion still exists on how to effectively identify, present and analyze these parameters within the context of an MDR-compliant CER. How do they tie together? How do they help you “tell the story” of the CER?
Click here to watch the recording of this session.
Presented from the point of view of seasoned MDR-compliant CER medical writers, this session will take a practical approach to:
There will be time at the end of this session to ask questions. Please submit your questions ahead of time while registering for this session so we have ample time to answer them thoughtfully. You may choose to send in your questions during the presentation as well.
Those Regulatory, Quality and Clinical leaders and teams who develop, write, review, or approve clinical evaluation reports for MDR submissions. Anyone interested in learning more about MDR requirements for CERs is also welcome to attend. Also, we encourage professionals from the IVD industry to attend as well, as the content is also relevant to IVDR requirements, which align closely with MDR.
This white paper is a companion piece to our popular webinar where we cover strategies to verify device safety and performance in the clinical evaluation of medical and in vitro diagnostic (IVDs) devices. This white paper should help you with identifying meaningful safety and performance measures for clinical or performance evaluation and with defining acceptance criteria parameters to determine the acceptability of benefit-risk as mandated by Medical Device Regulation (MDR) 2017/745 and In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR) 2017/746.
Establishing your device’s safety and performance is a critical component of the clinical evaluation process. However, how to use the state of the art section within the Clinical Evaluation Report (CER) and Performance Evaluation Report (PER) to establish the device’s safety and performance objectives and acceptance criteria can seem ambiguous.
In Part 1 of our IVD Deep Dive series, we discussed the importance of selecting meaningful performance objectives and explained how these objectives help establish the acceptance criteria. Part 2 of our series will pick up from there with strategies to identify sources of clinical data for your IVD.
Presented from the point of view of seasoned MDR-compliant CER medical writers, this session will present strategies for the verification of IVD clinical performance in the PER. This presentation should help you identify meaningful and measurable performance measures and identify sources of clinical data to support the Clinical Performance Report (CPR).
Key Takeaways:
Those Regulatory, Quality and Clinical leaders and teams who develop, write, review, or approve clinical performance reports for IVDR submissions.
In vitro diagnostic (IVD) medical devices in the European Union are being held to a higher standard of scrutiny with the introduction of In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR) 2017/746 by the European Commission (EC).
The implementation of IVDR dramatically changes the regulatory landscape for IVD medical devices. Some of the biggest changes include an expanded definition of IVDs and a new classification of IVDs. Some other changes are the requirement of Unique Device Identification (UDI) on each device, an expansion of the Quality Management System, and the increased need for Notified Body (NB) review.
The transition into IVDR is already underway. Consequently, IVDs marketed in the EU will continue to require a CE Marking certificate. This is necessary to verify that the device meets all the regulatory requirements. Indeed, failure to meet the IVDR deadlines could be very costly to manufacturers. They would either lose their CE Marking or fail to obtain one.
Read more on this topic in our blog post, here.
How do I define acceptance criteria and how do I define safety and performance objectives?
What are the biggest pitfalls or “Achille’s heels” to watch out for in identifying safety and performance measures?
In this webinar, we’ll take a deep dive into the best practices to identify relevant and appropriate Safety and Performance Objectives and Acceptance Criteria for your Performance Evaluation Report (PER). First, using a case study example, we’ll discuss considerations and provide tips to help you select relevant Safety & Performance Objectives for your IVD. Additionally, we’ll discuss how these objectives relate to the competitive landscape and State-of-the-Art (SOA) section of your PER. Then we’ll explain how these objectives help establish Acceptance Criteria, a critical input for establishing the SOA in your PER.
Those Regulatory, Quality and Clinical leaders and teams who develop, write, review, or approve performance evaluation reports for IVDR submissions.
In vitro diagnostic (IVD) medical devices in the European Union are being held to a higher standard of scrutiny with the introduction of In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR) 2017/746 by the European Commission (EC).
The implementation of IVDR dramatically changes the regulatory landscape for IVD medical devices. Some of the biggest changes include an expanded definition of IVDs and a new classification of IVDs. Some other changes are the requirement of Unique Device Identification (UDI) on each device, an expansion of the Quality Management System, and the increased need for Notified Body (NB) review.
The transition into IVDR is already underway. Consequently, IVDs marketed in the EU will continue to require a CE Marking certificate. This is necessary to verify that the device meets all the regulatory requirements. Indeed, failure to meet the IVDR deadlines could be very costly to manufacturers. They would either lose their CE Marking or fail to obtain one.
Read more on this topic in our blog post, here.
In this webinar, we discuss the importance of scoping to help you identify critical internal documents needed for IVDR-readiness. First, we know a PER has many moving pieces. Accordingly, we’ll present strategies to keep you and your team on track and help assess your own level of preparedness. Next, using our CE Scoping checklist, we will walk through the essential IVDR documents. Additionally, we’ll discuss SOPs, processes, reports, and templates, and explain how each of these fits into the overall process of preparing to write.
Those Regulatory, Quality and Clinical leaders and teams who are tasked with the development, writing, review or approval of performance evaluation reports for IVDR submissions.
Click here to watch the recording of this webinar.
Watch our free webinar where Laurie Mitchell and Caroline Byrd discuss and share key “lessons learned” from their years of experience supporting medical device manufacturers in the transition from MDD to MDR and current IVD companies transition to IVDR compliance. How can the insights gained from the MDR experience support and inform IVD companies as they transition to IVDR?
Key takeaways from the discussion include:
All regulatory, clinical, and scientific professionals who develop, write, review, or approve scientific manuscripts, reports, presentations, and other forms of communications in the medical device, pharmaceutical, and diagnostics space.
Fill out this form, or contact us at info@criterionedge.com, and we would be happy to answer any of your questions as well as book you an appointment to discuss your project needs during a time that works for you.
In this discussion, we provide an overview of how to plan and coordinate change within an organization to meet upcoming EU IVDR regulatory requirements. We will be highlighting key steps involved in helping medical affairs transition to a more rigorous regulatory environments, and how to evaluate talent gaps, team leadership composition, and process challenges of your product portfolio.
In this discussion, our panel of proven leaders discuss the key elements that support and propel the innovation process in the medical device, pharmaceutical, and IVD industries. We will be highlighting key areas of the process, important players in the pathway to the market, and how successful innovations spawn new innovations in new markets such as the digital health space, and more.
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Read more about our privacy policy here.
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.
This website uses Google Tag Manager and Pardot's tracking features to collect information such as the number of visitors to the site, and the most popular pages. Keeping this cookie enabled helps us to improve our website.
Please enable Strictly Necessary Cookies first so that we can save your preferences!
