Yes, I want to speak to your case in point about medical devices, and specifically in my area of medical devices for clinical decision support.
As it currently stands, we're in a different landscape now to the United States in the regulatory process for clinical decision support systems, in that we have actually relaxed in Canada the clinical decision support system medical device ruling and infrastructure that's required, and testing for that.
One of the things that I think we have to look at when we're looking at devices is to stop thinking about them as boxes at the bedside. We need to have a holistic approach nationally to think about the software. We are slowing down our ability to innovate, and we're slowing down our ability to make that translation at the bedside when we have to think of them as boxes as opposed to the software infrastructure on them.
The step we've taken at the moment with the current landscape for clinical decision support is appropriate. In our case, for the types of tools we're building, we're building indicators and metrics that support a clinician in making a decision. We don't definitively say, “This is now infection, this is now intraventricular hemorrhage”, but we provide analysis and show, based on our gold standard research, that we're seeing the same sorts of correlations.
I think we are on the right track with the way we are currently mandating and regulating medical devices, but I do think we need to start looking at how we can make that process move through more quickly and smoothly by considering the software as opposed to a hardware-type device.