Skip to main content

Automating Expert-Defined Tests: A Suitable Approach for the Medical Device Industry?

  • Conference paper
Software Process Improvement (EuroSPI 2009)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 42))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 992 Accesses

Abstract

Testing is frequently reported as a crucial stage in the software development process. With traditional approaches acceptance testing is the last stage of the process before release to customer. Acceptance Test Driven Development (ATDD) promotes the role of an expert customer in defining tests and uses tool support to automate and execute these tests. Here the challenge is to support such an expert in the reuse of existing documentation. This paper details an experiment in a generic domain while outlining plans for development of an automated testing model that could assist medical device companies to adhere to regulatory guidelines by providing them with a fully traceable testing artifacts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sommerville, I.: Software Engineering, 8th edn., pp. 80–81. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2007)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Pressman, R.S.: Software Engineering: A Practitioner‘s Approach, European Adaption, 5th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (2000)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Tassey, G.: The economic impacts of inadequate infrastructure for software testing, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) (May 2002)

    Google Scholar 

  4. CDRH, General Principles of Software Validation; Final Guidance for Industry and medical device Staff (January 11, 2002)

    Google Scholar 

  5. CDRH, Guidance for the Content of Premarket Submissions for Software Contained in Medical Devices; Guidance for Industry and medical device Staff (May 11, 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  6. CDRH, Off-The-Shelf Software Use in Medical Devices; Guidance for Industry, medical device Reviewers and Compliance (September 9, 1999)

    Google Scholar 

  7. ANSI/AAMI/ISO 14971, Medical devices - Application of risk management to medical devices, 2nd edn. (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  8. ANSI/AAMI/IEC 62304, Medical device software - Software life cycle processes (July 19, 2006)

    Google Scholar 

  9. ISPE, GAMP Guide for Validation of Automated Systems (December 2001)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Beck, K., Andres, C.: Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change, 2nd edn. Addison Wesley, Boston (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Sauvé, J.P., Neto, O.L.A.: Teaching software development with ATDD and EasyAccept. In: SIGCSE 2008: Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer Science Education, pp. 542–546 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cohn, M.: User Stories Applied. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Beck, K.: Test Driven Development: By Example. Addison-Wesley Professional, Reading (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jeffries, R., Melnik, G.: Guest editors introduction: TDD- the art of fearless programming. IEEE Software 24(3), 24–30 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Beck, K., Gamma, E., Saff, D.: JUnit 4, http://junit.sourceforge.net/ (last accessed January 16, 2009)

  16. Park, S.S., Maurer, F.: The benefits and challenges of executable acceptance testing. In: APOS 2008: Proceedings of the 2008 international workshop on Scrutinizing agile practices or shoot-out at the agile corral, pp. 19–22 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Andrea, J.: Envisioning the next generation of functional testing tools. IEEE Software 24(03), 58–66 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Crumpler, E.S., Rudolph, H.: FDA software policy and regulation of medical device software. Food Drug Law Journal 52, 511–516 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Munsey, R.R.: Trends and events in FDA regulation of medical devices over the last fifty years. Food Drug Law Journal 50, 163–177 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Medical device reporting: Improvements needed in FDAs system for monitoring problems with approved devices, US General Accounting Office, GAO/HEHS-97-21 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Bovee, M.W., Paul, D.L., Nelson, K.M.: A Framework for Assessing the Use of Third-Party Software Quality Assurance Standards to Meet FDA Medical Device Software Process Control Guidelines. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 48(4), 465–478 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kohn, L., Corrigan, J., Donaldson, M.: To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System. National Academy Press (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Wallace, D.R., Kuhn, D.R.: Failure Modes in Medical Device Software: An analysis of 15 Years of Recall data. NIST, http://csrc.nist.gov/staff/kuhn/final-rqse.pdf (last accessed, January 2007)

  24. Jamieson, J.: Regulation of medical devices involving software in Australia - an overview. In: 6th Australian Workshop on Safety Critical Systems and Software, Brisbane (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Leffingwell, D.A., Widrig, D.R., Morrissey, W.T.: Applying requirements management to medical devices utilizing software, Rational Software Corporation (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kasatani, S.: Selenium IDE, http://seleniumhq.org/ (last accessed December 1, 2008)

  27. RSpec Development Team, http://rspec.info (last accessed December 1, 2008)

  28. Sauvé, J.P., Cirne, W., Osorinho, Coelho, R.: EasyAccept Sourceforge Project, http://easyaccept.sourceforge.net (last accessed December 3, 2008)

  29. Jain, N.: Acceptance Test Driven Development. Presentation, http://www.slideshare.net/nashjain/acceptance-test-driven-development-350264/ (last accessed November 30, 2008)

  30. Cunningham, W.: Framework for Integrated Test, September 2002, http://fit.c2.com (last accessed January 16, 2009)

  31. FitNesse.org., http://fitnesse.org (last accessed February 7, 2008)

  32. Schwarz, C., Skytteren, S.K., Øvstetun, T.M.: AutAT: an eclipse plugin for automatic acceptance testing of web applications. In: OOPSLA 2005: Companion to the 20th annual ACM SIGPLAN conference on OOPSLA, pp. 182–183 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Deng, C., Wilson, P., Maurer, F.: FitClipse: A FIT-based Eclipse plug-in for Executable Acceptance Test Driven Development. In: Concas, G., Damiani, E., Scotto, M., Succi, G. (eds.) XP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4536, pp. 93–100. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Mugridge, R.: Managing agile project requirements with storytest-driven development. IEEE Software 25, 68–75 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Pyxis Technologies inc., GreenPepper Sofware, http://www.greenpeppersoftware.com/confluence (last accessed January 19, 2009)

  36. Melnik, G., Maurer, F.: The practice of specifying requirements using executable acceptance tests in computer science courses. In: OOPSLA 2005: Companion to the 20th annual ACM SIGPLAN conference on OOPSLA, pp. 365–370 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Ricca, F., Penta, M.D., Torchiano, M., Tonella, P., Ceccato, M., Visaggio, C.A.: Are fit tables really talking?: a series of experiments to understand whether fit tables are useful during evolution tasks. In: ICSE 2008: Proceedings of the 30th international conference on Software engineering, pp. 361–370 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Free Software Foundation, About the GNU Project, http://www.gnu.org/gnu/the-gnu-project.html (last access January 16, 2009)

  39. FDA‘s Mission Statement, http://www.fda.gov/opacom/morechoices/mission.html (last access March 18, 2009)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Connolly, D., Mc Caffery, F., Keenan, F. (2009). Automating Expert-Defined Tests: A Suitable Approach for the Medical Device Industry?. In: O’Connor, R.V., Baddoo, N., Cuadrago Gallego, J., Rejas Muslera, R., Smolander, K., Messnarz, R. (eds) Software Process Improvement. EuroSPI 2009. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 42. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04133-4_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04133-4_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-04132-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-04133-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics