Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25844154›Full record

ArticleInterface focus2015

Comparison of generic and subject-specific models for simulation of pulmonary perfusion and forced expiration.

Kerry L Hedges, Alys R Clark, Merryn H Tawhai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Interface focus, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors.

Kerry L HedgesAuckland Bioengineering Institute , University of Auckland , Private Bag 92019, Auckland , New Zealand.
Alys R ClarkAuckland Bioengineering Institute , University of Auckland , Private Bag 92019, Auckland , New Zealand.
Merryn H TawhaiAuckland Bioengineering Institute , University of Auckland , Private Bag 92019, Auckland , New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The goal of translating multiscale model analysis of pulmonary function into population studies is challenging because of the need to derive a geometric model for each subject. This could be addressed by using a generic model with appropriate customization to subject-specific data. Here, we present a quantitative comparison of simulating two fundamental behaviours of the lung-its haemodynamic response to vascular occlusion, and the forced expiration in 1 s (FEV1) following bronchoconstriction-in subject-specific and generic models. When the subjects are considered as a group, there is no significant difference between predictions of mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP), pulmonary vascular resistance or forced expiration; however, significant differences are apparent in the prediction of arterial oxygen, for both baseline and post-occlusion. Despite the apparent consistency of the generic and subject-specific models, a third of subjects had generic model under-prediction of the increase in mPAP following occlusion, and half had the decrease in arterial oxygen over-predicted; two subjects had considerable differences in the percentage reduction of FEV1 following bronchoconstriction. The generic model approach can be useful for physiologically directed studies but is not appropriate for simulating pathophysiological function that is strongly dependent on interaction with lung structure.

Indexed as

acute pulmonary embolismforced expirationpulmonary perfusionwave speed limitation

Identifiers

PMID25844154
PMCPMC4342950

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.