Regulating Certification Bodies in the Field of Medical Devices: The PIP Breast Implants Litigation and Beyond
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article uses the breast implants scandal around the French producer Poly Implant Prothèse (PIP) to discuss the regulation of medical devices in EU law. Thereby, the specific focus is on the role of tort liability of certification bodies in complementing the public law regime of medical devices law. As tort law has not been harmonized yet at the level of EU law, national legal systems may produce different results; which indeed the PIP case demonstrates, with diverging judgments from French and German courts. Showing the deficiencies of the public law system of the Medical Devices Directive of 1993 as well as of the new Medical Devices Regulation of 2017, the article argues that tort liability is a necessary regulatory instrument to ensure that certification bodies live up to their duties under medical devices law and therefore a necessary instrument for the protection of the health and safety of patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it