ArticleJournal of cardiovascular translational research2018
Clinical Applications of Patient-Specific Models: The Case for a Simple Approach.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular translational research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Computational Model of Ventricular Dimensions and Hemodynamics in Growing Infants.Journal of biomechanical engineering · 2023Article
- Impact of TAVR on coronary artery hemodynamics using clinical measurements and image-based patient-specific in silico modeling.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Editorial: Data assimilation in cardiovascular medicine: Merging experimental measurements with physics-based computational models.Frontiers in physiology · 2023Article
- Clinical Impact of Computational Heart Valve Models.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- A Lumped Two-Compartment Model for Simulation of Ventricular Pump and Tissue Mechanics in Ischemic Heart Disease.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Article
- Predictions of hypertrophy and its regression in response to pressure overload.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2020Article
- Computational models in cardiology.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2019Review
- Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Over the past several decades, increasingly sophisticated models of the heart have provided important insights into cardiac physiology and are increasingly used to predict the impact of diseases and therapies on the heart. In an era of personalized medicine, many envision patient-specific computational models as a powerful tool for personalizing therapy. Yet the complexity of current models poses important challenges, including identifying model parameters and completing calculations quickly enough for routine clinical use. We propose that early clinical successes are likely to arise from an alternative approach: relatively simple, fast, phenomenologic models with a small number of parameters that can be easily (and automatically) customized. We discuss examples of simple yet foundational models that have already made a tremendous impact on clinical education and practice, and make the case that reducing rather than increasing model complexity may be the key to realizing the promise of patient-specific modeling for clinical applications.
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.