ReviewNPJ digital medicine2024
"Towards harmonizing assessment and reimbursement of digital medical devices in the EU through mutual learning".
Review in NPJ digital medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 25 papers.
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
25 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fracture healing: from molecular and cellular mechanisms to therapeutic strategies.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Review
- Evaluating the First CE-Marked LLM-Based Chatbot for Evidence-Based Neurology.European journal of neurology · 2026Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Chatbot-Supported Remote Patient Monitoring for Anticoagulation Management: Health Economic Evaluation Within a Pilot Crossover Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Measuring eHealth Literacy in the European Economic Area, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Innovative Clinical Trial Approach for Evaluating Digital Medical Devices Under European Fast-Track Regulatory Frameworks.Statistics in medicine · 2026Article
- Expected Competencies and Personal Attributes of Digital Health Navigators to Support Digital Mental Health Care: Focus Group and Interview Study With Patients and Health Care Professionals.JMIR mental health · 2026Article
- A scoping review on using real-world data to evaluate the effectiveness of mHealth applications.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence, Connected Care, and Enabling Digital Health Technologies in Rare Diseases With a Focus on Lysosomal Storage Disorders: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Pricing models for diagnostic AI based on qualitative insights from healthcare decision makers.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Exploring general practitioners' perspectives on the use and benefits of digital health applications for mental disorders in primary care: a mixed-methods study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- General Practitioners' Perspectives on Digital Health Applications for Mental Disorders and Their Prescribing Behavior: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR mental health · 2026Article
- Data-driven closed-loop health education: constructing an integrated assessment-intervention-feedback pathway for digital COPD management-a perspective.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- The Italian landscape of digital therapeutics in a European context.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- My Cosmos: development, clinical protocol, and preliminary usability of a gamified transdiagnostic digital CBT platform.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Health economic evaluations of digital health technologies-a rapid review of applied methods.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Genie in the bottle? a qualitative study of general practitioners' perspectives and information needs concerning digital mental health applications in Germany.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Predictors of Perceived Need for and Prescribing of Digital Health Applications for Mental Disorders Among Psychotherapists in Germany: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- MAPPING current decision-making pathways and reimbursement processes for high-risk medical devices in EU/EEA member states and the UK: a scoping review.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2025Article
- An Overview on Methods, Evidence, and Study Quality of Health Economic Evaluation Studies for Independently Usable Digital Health Apps: Rapid Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Review
- Comprehensive policies for scaling systemic and equitable integration of digital health technologies.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital medical devices (DMDs) present unique opportunities in their regulation and reimbursement. A dynamic landscape of DMD assessment frameworks is emerging within the European Union, with five clusters of prevailing approaches identified. Despite notable gaps in maturity levels, cross-country learning effects are becoming prevalent. We expect more countries, both within the EU and beyond, to follow the steps of current frontrunners, hence expediting the harmonization process.
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.