Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29349296›Full record

ArticleScience advances2018

Unlocking data sets by calibrating populations of models to data density: A study in atrial electrophysiology.

Brodie A J Lawson, Christopher C Drovandi, Nicole Cusimano, Pamela Burrage, Blanca Rodriguez, Kevin Burrage

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science advances, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing 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

43 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Computational modelling of biological systems now and then: revisiting tools and visions from the beginning of the century.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Computational Modeling of Cardiac Electrophysiology.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The promise of digital healthcare technologies.Frontiers in public health · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Graph-based homogenisation for modelling cardiac fibrosis.Journal of computational physics · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Brodie A J LawsonAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Mathematical and Statistical Frontiers, School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1317-5988
Christopher C DrovandiAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Mathematical and Statistical Frontiers, School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9222-8763
Nicole CusimanoBasque Center for Applied Mathematics, Bilbao, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-1373-1334
Pamela BurrageAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Mathematical and Statistical Frontiers, School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6612-3084
Blanca RodriguezDepartment of Computer Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Kevin BurrageAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Mathematical and Statistical Frontiers, School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8111-1137

Funding

National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research NC/P001076/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The understanding of complex physical or biological systems nearly always requires a characterization of the variability that underpins these processes. In addition, the data used to calibrate these models may also often exhibit considerable variability. A recent approach to deal with these issues has been to calibrate populations of models (POMs), multiple copies of a single mathematical model but with different parameter values, in response to experimental data. To date, this calibration has been largely limited to selecting models that produce outputs that fall within the ranges of the data set, ignoring any trends that might be present in the data. We present here a novel and general methodology for calibrating POMs to the distributions of a set of measured values in a data set. We demonstrate our technique using a data set from a cardiac electrophysiology study based on the differences in atrial action potential readings between patients exhibiting sinus rhythm (SR) or chronic atrial fibrillation (cAF) and the Courtemanche-Ramirez-Nattel model for human atrial action potentials. Not only does our approach accurately capture the variability inherent in the experimental population, but we also demonstrate how the POMs that it produces may be used to extract additional information from the data used for calibration, including improved identification of the differences underlying stratified data. We also show how our approach allows different hypotheses regarding the variability in complex systems to be quantitatively compared.

Indexed as

Datasets as TopicElectrophysiological PhenomenaModels, CardiovascularAction PotentialsAtrial FibrillationBiomarkersCalibrationCoronary SinusHeart AtriaHumansMonte Carlo MethodSodium ChannelsBiomarkersSodium Channels

Identifiers

PMID29349296
PMCPMC5770172

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.