ReviewJournal of healthcare engineering2023
Critical Device Reliability Assessment in Healthcare Services.
Review in Journal of healthcare engineering, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic performance of machine-learning algorithms for sepsis prediction: An updated meta-analysis.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Charting Advances in Asset Management Systems: A Bibliometric Analysis Revealing Applications and Potential in Healthcare.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Scientometric analysis of publications in Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma since its inception.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Medical Device Aging and Replacement Decisions within Hospital Environments: A User-Centered Approach.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
- Improving the non-structural preparedness of the selected hospital based on the FOCUS-PDCABMC emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Systematic review of predictive maintenance and digital twin technologies challenges, opportunities, and best practices.PeerJ. Computer science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medical device reliability is the ability of medical devices to endure functioning and is indispensable to ensure service delivery to patients. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) technique was employed in May 2021 to evaluate existing reporting guidelines on medical device reliability. The systematic searching is conducted in eight different databases, including Web of Science, Science Direct, Scopus, IEEE Explorer, Emerald, MEDLINE Complete, Dimensions, and Springer Link, with 36 articles shortlisted from the year 2010 to May 2021. This study aims to epitomize existing literature on medical device reliability, scrutinize existing literature outcomes, investigate parameters affecting medical device reliability, and determine the scientific research gaps. The result of the systematic review listed three main topics on medical device reliability: risk management, performance prediction using Artificial Intelligence or machine learning, and management system. The medical device reliability assessment challenges are inadequate maintenance cost data, determining significant input parameter selection, difficulties accessing healthcare facilities, and limited age in service. Medical device systems are interconnected and interoperating, which increases complexity in assessing their reliability. To the best of our knowledge, although machine learning has become popular in predicting medical device performance, the existing models are only applicable to selected devices such as infant incubators, syringe pumps, and defibrillators. Despite the importance of medical device reliability assessment, there is no explicit protocol and predictive model to anticipate the situation. The problem worsens with the unavailability of a comprehensive assessment strategy for critical medical devices. Therefore, this study reviews the current state of critical device reliability in healthcare facilities. The present knowledge can be improved by adding new scientific data emphasis on critical medical devices used in healthcare services.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.