ISO 13485:2016 clause 7.3 (Design and development), which the QMSR incorporates through §820.10 and which carries the medical-device design controls. (7.3.1) GENERAL - a documented design and development procedure; (7.3.2) PLANNING - planned and documented stages, reviews, verification, validation and transfer activities, responsibilities, traceability and resources, updated as the work progresses; (7.3.3) INPUTS - functional, performance, usability and safety needs for the intended use, applicable regulatory requirements and standards, risk-management outputs, information from earlier similar designs and other essential needs, reviewed for adequacy and approved; (7.3.4) OUTPUTS - in a form that can be verified against the inputs, approved before release, giving what purchasing, production and service need and the product acceptance criteria; (7.3.5) REVIEW - systematic reviews at planned stages involving the functions concerned, with records; (7.3.6) VERIFICATION - to documented plans with methods, acceptance criteria and a sample-size rationale, confirming outputs meet inputs, including when the device is connected to other devices; (7.3.7) VALIDATION - to documented plans on representative product (initial production units, batches or equivalents), including clinical or performance evaluation where regulations call for it, finished before release to the customer; (7.3.8) TRANSFER - documented procedures confirming outputs are suitable for manufacturing before they become final production specifications; (7.3.9) CONTROL OF CHANGES - changes identified, their significance assessed, then reviewed, verified, validated as appropriate and approved before implementation, with records; (7.3.10) DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT FILE - kept for each device type or family, holding or referencing the records of conformity and of changes. The QMSR no longer uses the former QSR term design history file (DHF); the 7.3.10 file carries that content.
This control maps to 23 controls across 11 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 23 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.