MDR, Annex XIV, list of clinical evaluation activities The current wording does not reflect the actual logic of the clinical evaluation process and may therefore create confusion and inconsistent interpretation. First, the listed items are presented as a linear sequence, although in practice the clinical evaluation is not carried out in that order.
PRO-LIANCE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS GmbH
Company · Germany
not in the EU Transparency RegisterThis organization files on consultations without a register number, so its record here is built from its filings alone. Register facts (staff, costs, accreditations) are not available for it.
Counts here are a floor, never a total: they cover the 665 consultation files tracked so far (57,774 submissions, mostly 2021–26), so an organization's real filing history is larger, not smaller.
Track PRO-LIANCE in PolicySpeak: request access →
Work at PRO-LIANCE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS GmbH? so we know who speaks for it.
Their record over time
PRO-LIANCE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS GmbH filed 4 positions on 9 Mar 2026, across 1 of the 665 legislative files tracked here.
What they argued
MDR, Annex XIV, last bullet in bullet list The current wording, and a PMCF, lacks clarity and may give rise to interpretative uncertainty. The use of the indefinite article suggests that the provision refers to one specific PMCF activity or measure, but the text does not identify which activity is intended.
MDR, Annex XIV, bullet list New bullet point on benefit-risk issues is not clear and easy to understand because "benefit-risk issues" are undefined. Proposal to improve the sentence to make it easier to understand: An indication of how component-specific benefit-risk considerations, including those arising from the use of pharmaceutical substances, non-viable substances of human origin, or non-viable animal tissues…
MDR, Annex XIV bullet list. Improve wording of "indicative list" to avoid confusion. The current wording is one of the sources of misunderstandings and most often deficiencies, creating a chicken-egg loop for manufacturers, leading to the CEPs that require the assessment of state of the art before the plan is done.
Looking for an argument rather than an organization? Search every submission for a phrase and see everyone who used it.
Put PRO-LIANCE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS GmbH next to another organization. Same files, same register facts, side by side. Compare →
Is this your organization?
Everything on this page comes from PRO-LIANCE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS GmbH’s own submissions to the European Commission. We have added nothing and interpreted nothing. If something is wrong or out of date, email info@policyspeak.com and we will correct it. If you are an individual named in a record, our privacy policy sets out your rights to correction, objection and removal.
Quotes are verbatim from submissions published by the European Commission, trimmed to their opening passage and never summarized by a model. Organizations only, never individuals. Reused under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU; the European Commission is not liable for this reuse.