Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25747903›Full record

ArticleMathematical biosciences2015

Bifurcation study of blood flow control in the kidney.

Ashlee N Ford Versypt, Elizabeth Makrides, Julia C Arciero, Laura Ellwein, Anita T Layton

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Mathematical biosciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Ashlee N Ford VersyptSchool of Chemical Engineering, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078, USA.
Elizabeth MakridesDivision of Applied Mathematics, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912, USA. Electronic address: elizabeth_makrides@brown.edu.
Julia C ArcieroDepartment of Mathematical Sciences, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA.
Laura EllweinDepartment of Mathematics and Applied Mathematics, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23284, USA.
Anita T LaytonDepartment of Mathematics, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA.
Brown University · USDuke University · USOklahoma State University · USUniversity of Indianapolis · USVirginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

Modeling Solute Transport and Urine Concentrating Mechanism in the Rat KidneyR01DK089066 · NIDDK · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI LAYTON, ANITA · 2010 to 2014
$1.2M
NIDDK NIH HHS DK089066NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK089066
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Renal blood flow is maintained within a narrow window by a set of intrinsic autoregulatory mechanisms. Here, a mathematical model of renal hemodynamics control in the rat kidney is used to understand the interactions between two major renal autoregulatory mechanisms: the myogenic response and tubuloglomerular feedback. A bifurcation analysis of the model equations is performed to assess the effects of the delay and sensitivity of the feedback system and the time constants governing the response of vessel diameter and smooth muscle tone. The results of the bifurcation analysis are verified using numerical simulations of the full nonlinear model. Both the analytical and numerical results predict the generation of limit cycle oscillations under certain physiologically relevant conditions, as observed in vivo.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalHumansRenal CirculationBifurcation analysisDelay differential equationMyogenic responseRenal hemodynamicsTubuloglomerular feedback

Identifiers

PMID25747903
PMCPMC4768488
OpenAlexW2020507643

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.