PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S11346-11348)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Dec 6, 2006
Pediatric Medical Device Safety and Improvement Act of 2006 - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require an application for the approval of a medical device or a product development protocol to include: (1) a description of any pediatric subpopulations that suffer from the disease or condition that the device is intended to treat, diagnose, or cure; and (2) the number of affected pediatric patients.
Excludes a medical device distributed pursuant to the humanitarian device exemption from the prohibition that no device be sold for an amount that exceeds the cost of the device if: (1) the device is intended for the treatment or diagnosis of a disease or condition that occurs in pediatric patients; and (2) other specified requirements are met.
Requires the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to designate a contact point to help innovators and physicians access funding for pediatric medical device development.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to award grants for demonstration projects to promote pediatric device development.
Includes as a duty of the Office of Pediatric Therapeutics increasing pediatric access to medical devices.
Allows the Secretary to require: (1) postmarket surveillance on certain devices that are expected to have significant use in pediatric populations; and (2) a prospective surveillance period of more than 36 months for such devices, as necessary.
Requires the Secretary, acting through the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, to establish a publicly accessible database of all studies and surveillance of medical devices.
Requires the Secretary to adopt voluntary national standards for medical device coding.
People & committees
Sen. Dodd, Christopher J. [D-CT] · D–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S11346-11348)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S11343-11346)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 15, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.4098 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.4098 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.4098 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.4098 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.