↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Post-market clinical research conducted by medical device manufacturers: a cross-sectional survey

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
Title
Post-market clinical research conducted by medical device manufacturers: a cross-sectional survey
Published in
Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, May 2015
DOI 10.2147/mder.s82964
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joseph S Ross, Katrina L Blount, Jessica D Ritchie, Beth Hodshon, Harlan M Krumholz

Abstract

In the US, once a medical device is made available for use, several requirements have been established by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ensure ongoing post-market surveillance of device safety and effectiveness. Our objective was to determine how commonly medical device manufacturers initiate post-market clinical studies or augment FDA post-market surveillance requirements for higher-risk devices that are most often approved via the FDA's pre-market approval (PMA) pathway. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 47 manufacturers with operations in California, Minnesota, and Massachusetts who market devices approved via the PMA pathway. Among 22 respondents (response rate =47%), nearly all self-reported conducting post-market clinical research studies, commonly between 1 and 5; only 1 respondent reported never conducting post-market clinical research studies. While manufacturers most often engaged in these studies to satisfy FDA requirements, other reasons were reported, including performance monitoring and surveillance and market acceptance initiatives. Risks of conducting and not conducting post-market clinical research studies were described through open-ended response to questions. Medical device manufacturers commonly initiate post-market clinical studies at the request of the FDA. Clinical data from these studies should be integrated into national post-market surveillance initiatives.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 44 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Master 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Other 12 26%
Unknown 6 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 37%
Engineering 6 13%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 9 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 May 2015.
All research outputs
#17,348,916
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#193
of 314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,167
of 279,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 279,093 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.