5 ms·

Citation #1: Navigate to https://ec.europa.eu/budget/financial-transparency-system/analysis.html https://ec.europa.eu/budget/financial-transparency-system/an..

Citation #1: Navigate to https://ec.europa.eu/budget/financial-transparency-system/analysis.html https://ec.europa.eu/budget/financial-transparency-system/an... 1. Enter "subject of grant or contract" = "eudamed" [enter] 2. Receive the numbers until 2022 inclusive (2023 is incomplete). 3. Extrapolate conservatively. Citation #2: We received documents as part of a "freedom of information act" request (the EU version, named differently) which we published here. Those include numbers for 2022 and the head count, among other things. https://openregulatory.com/articles/beudamed-better-eudamed https://openregulatory.com/articles/beudamed-better-eudamed

bilekas 1y ago
> You throw your computer out of the window, quit your regulatory job and vote "Yes" on Brexit. Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater. > Okay okay, yes, this is a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison: The EUDAMED team had to spend time on the upfront work modelling the data structures (not that the end result is super great), and they also had to build the whole "entering data" kind of stuff which our solution doesn't have. Sure, the EUDAMED team had more work. But 300x more work? This is something we hear all too often and it never passes the smell test. "Well you finished that feature in 1 day so I can give you 5 features for this week" It's not the same. I agree it could be better, but there are graph databases with the data that work extremely well for my requests anyway. But sure, you offer a right click solution. Great, but I "imagine" it doesn't fit everyone's requirements. Let alone any legacy integrations that might already be there.