ReviewThe Journal of physiology2016
Using physiologically based models for clinical translation: predictive modelling, data interpretation or something in-between?
Review in The Journal of physiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Computer Modeling of Valve Disease: A New Old Technique to Understand and Predict Outcomes.JACC. Advances · 2022Article
- Computational models in cardiology.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2019Review
- Validation and Trustworthiness of Multiscale Models of Cardiac Electrophysiology.Frontiers in physiology · 2018Review
- Imaging-Based Simulations for Predicting Sudden Death and Guiding Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation.Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology · 2017Review
- The Cardiac Physiome Project.The Journal of physiology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Heart disease continues to be a significant clinical problem in Western society. Predictive models and simulations that integrate physiological understanding with patient information derived from clinical data have huge potential to contribute to improving our understanding of both the progression and treatment of heart disease. In particular they provide the potential to improve patient selection and optimisation of cardiovascular interventions across a range of pathologies. Currently a significant proportion of this potential is still to be realised. In this paper we discuss the opportunities and challenges associated with this realisation. Reviewing the successful elements of model translation for biophysically based models and the emerging supporting technologies, we propose three distinct modes of clinical translation. Finally we outline the challenges ahead that will be fundamental to overcome if the ultimate goal of fully personalised clinical cardiac care is to be achieved.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.