-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Mobile apps as medical devices
Vincenzo Della Mea, Fabrizio Chiarizia, Omar Vuattolo
Jazyk angličtina Země Česko
Typ dokumentu hodnotící studie
- MeSH
- Evropská unie MeSH
- legislativa o zdravotnickém vybavení MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mobilní aplikace * klasifikace statistika a číselné údaje využití zákonodárství a právo MeSH
- podpora zdraví MeSH
- směrnice jako téma MeSH
- software * klasifikace normy zákonodárství a právo MeSH
- telemedicína * normy zákonodárství a právo MeSH
- tělesná výkonnost MeSH
- využití lékařské informatiky MeSH
- zdravotnické prostředky normy MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- hodnotící studie MeSH
Background: In 2007, the European Parliament and Council amended the previous version of its directive on medical devices, allowing software to be by its own a medical device. Objectives: Aim of the present paper is to discuss the above mentioned issue when applied to mobile apps, and to tentatively apply medical devices classification rules to a sample of apps. Methods: Medical devices can be assigned to four different classes (I, IIa, IIb, III) depending on their invasivity, clinical risk, duration of the contact with the body, and active or passive devices. Guidelines have been released regarding classification of software. We identified a sample of apps in Android Store (categories: Medical and Health&Fitness) suitable for such classifi- cation, and attempted to apply the above mentioned rules. Results: Among the 80 selected apps, 32 resulted not being classifiable as medical devices (40%), 20 as class I (25%), 26 as class IIa (32.5%), and 2 as class IIb (2.5%). If we look at ratings and number of downloads as a measure of apps usefulness, it seems like class II apps are slightly more useful than class I apps. Conclusions: It seems that a fair amount of present apps could be subject to medical device classification, and these of higher category (and thus higher risk) are those possibly more interesting for users. This pushes for some attention towards them, not necessarily in terms of ruling, but at least of clear identification of functions and limitations.
A S S n 6 ”Friuli Occidentale” Pordenone Italy
Dept of Mathematics and Computer Science University of Udine Italy
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
Literatura
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc16004352
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20200518220058.0
- 007
- cr|cn|
- 008
- 160210s2015 xr d fs 000 0|eng||
- 009
- eAR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.24105/ejbi.2015.11.3.5 $2 doi
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $d ABA008 $e AACR2 $b cze
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xr
- 100 1_
- $a Mea, Vincenzo Della $u Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Udine, Italy
- 245 10
- $a Mobile apps as medical devices / $c Vincenzo Della Mea, Fabrizio Chiarizia, Omar Vuattolo
- 504 __
- $a Literatura
- 520 3_
- $a Background: In 2007, the European Parliament and Council amended the previous version of its directive on medical devices, allowing software to be by its own a medical device. Objectives: Aim of the present paper is to discuss the above mentioned issue when applied to mobile apps, and to tentatively apply medical devices classification rules to a sample of apps. Methods: Medical devices can be assigned to four different classes (I, IIa, IIb, III) depending on their invasivity, clinical risk, duration of the contact with the body, and active or passive devices. Guidelines have been released regarding classification of software. We identified a sample of apps in Android Store (categories: Medical and Health&Fitness) suitable for such classifi- cation, and attempted to apply the above mentioned rules. Results: Among the 80 selected apps, 32 resulted not being classifiable as medical devices (40%), 20 as class I (25%), 26 as class IIa (32.5%), and 2 as class IIb (2.5%). If we look at ratings and number of downloads as a measure of apps usefulness, it seems like class II apps are slightly more useful than class I apps. Conclusions: It seems that a fair amount of present apps could be subject to medical device classification, and these of higher category (and thus higher risk) are those possibly more interesting for users. This pushes for some attention towards them, not necessarily in terms of ruling, but at least of clear identification of functions and limitations.
- 650 _2
- $a Evropská unie $7 D005062
- 650 _2
- $a zdravotnické prostředky $x normy $7 D004864
- 650 12
- $a software $x klasifikace $x normy $x zákonodárství a právo $7 D012984
- 650 _2
- $a směrnice jako téma $7 D017408
- 650 _2
- $a legislativa o zdravotnickém vybavení $7 D062307
- 650 12
- $a mobilní aplikace $x klasifikace $x statistika a číselné údaje $x využití $x zákonodárství a právo $7 D063731
- 650 12
- $a telemedicína $x normy $x zákonodárství a právo $7 D017216
- 650 _2
- $a využití lékařské informatiky $7 D008491
- 650 _2
- $a podpora zdraví $7 D006293
- 650 _2
- $a tělesná výkonnost $7 D010809
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 655 _2
- $a hodnotící studie $7 D023362
- 700 1_
- $a Chiarizia, Fabrizio $u A.S.S. n.6 ”Friuli Occidentale”, Pordenone, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a Vuattolo, Omar $u Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Udine, Italy
- 773 0_
- $t European journal for biomedical informatics $x 1801-5603 $g Roč. 11, č. 3 (2015), s. en22-en27 $w MED00173462
- 856 41
- $u https://www.ejbi.org/ $y domovská stránka časopisu - plný text volně přístupný
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b online $y 4 $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20160210060007 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20200518220112 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1106966 $s 928621
- BAS __
- $a 3 $a 4
- BMC __
- $a 2015 $b 11 $c 3 $d en22-en27 $i 1801-5603 $m European Journal for Biomedical Informatics $n Eur. J. Biomed. Inform. (Praha) $x MED00173462
- LZP __
- $c NLK188 $d 20160421 $a NLK 2016-08/vt