Compare

    Two terms, side by side

    Pick any two terms to see definitions, context, pitfalls, and sources in parallel.

    Curated comparison tables

    In-depth, attribute-by-attribute tables for the most common MedTech term pairs. Each row is sourced from the linked term pages.

    Clinical & Trials

    Clinical Evaluation Plan(CEP)

    In one line
    EU MDR document that defines the scope, methods, and acceptance criteria for the clinical evaluation that will be reported in the Clinical Evaluation Report (CER).
    Definition
    A Clinical Evaluation Plan (CEP) is a structured planning document required under EU MDR (Annex XIV Part A §1(a)) that defines how the manufacturer will conduct the clinical evaluation of a medical device. The CEP identifies the device and its intended purpose, the equivalence claim (if any), the clinical development stages, the data sources to be evaluated (clinical investigations, literature, post-market data), the acceptance criteria for clinical performance and safety, the benefit-risk methodology, and the plan for ongoing clinical evaluation through PMCF. The CER documents the execution of the CEP.
    Why it matters
    Under MDR, the CEP is the upfront commitment that disciplines the entire clinical evaluation process, Notified Bodies review the CEP for adequacy before accepting a CER. A weak or generic CEP is one of the most common causes of MDR clinical evaluation deficiencies. MDCG 2020-13 provides the CER assessment template that Notified Bodies use, and it is essentially scoring CER conformance against the CEP.
    Common pitfalls
    • •Writing a generic CEP that doesn't actually scope the clinical evaluation, Notified Bodies will issue major deficiencies.
    • •Skipping the equivalence rationale in the CEP and then claiming equivalence in the CER, must be planned upfront.
    • •Failing to align the CEP with the PMCF plan, they are intended to form a continuous evidence loop.
    Sources
    Open full page
    Select term B to compare.

    Why compare MedTech terms side by side?

    MedTech terminology is full of pairs that look interchangeable but carry very different regulatory, clinical, and commercial consequences. Picking the wrong framework, pathway, or standard early in a project can add months to a submission, invalidate clinical evidence, or trigger an audit finding. Side-by-side comparison is the fastest way to surface those differences before they become costly mistakes.

    Each comparison on this page pulls from the same vendor-neutral, sourced definitions used throughout the MedTech Terms glossary. You see the one-line summary, the formal definition, why it matters in practice, common pitfalls, and the primary sources (FDA guidance, EU MDR/IVDR articles, ISO/IEC standards, MDCG documents, IMDRF principles) that back each entry. That makes the comparison defensible in regulatory strategy memos, design reviews, and submission narratives.

    Common comparison patterns

    How to use this tool

    Pick term A and term B from the dropdowns, or click a preset above. The URL updates with both slugs so you can bookmark or share the exact comparison with a colleague, a notified body reviewer, or your regulatory consultant. Click Open full page on either side for the complete entry, including FAQs, related terms, and the full citation list. If you are not sure which term to start with, browse the Categories view or the A-Z index.

    MedTech Terms is a vendor-neutral community resource sponsored by Blue Goat Cyber. Definitions are written for educational use and are not legal or regulatory advice.