ReviewFrontiers in physiology2019
Credibility Evidence for Computational Patient Models Used in the Development of Physiological Closed-Loop Controlled Devices for Critical Care Medicine.
Review in Frontiers in physiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Credibility assessment of patient-specific modeling in transcatheter aortic valve implantation-Part 2: Uncertainty quantification and sensitivity analysis.APL bioengineering · 2025Article
- A GENERATIVE APPROACH TO TESTING THE PERFORMANCE OF PHYSIOLOGICAL CONTROL ALGORITHMS.ASME letters in dynamic systems and control · 2024Article
- Credibility assessment of in silico clinical trials for medical devices.PLoS computational biology · 2024Review
- Physiological Modeling of Hemodynamic Responses to Sodium Nitroprusside.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Global sensitivity analysis in physiologically-based pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic models of inhaled and opioids anesthetics and its application to generate virtual populations.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2022Article
- Design and execution of a verification, validation, and uncertainty quantification plan for a numerical model of left ventricular flow after LVAD implantation.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Biophysical Model: A Promising Method in the Study of the Mechanism of Propofol: A Narrative Review.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Review
- Closed-Loop Tracking and Regulation of Emotional Valence State From Facial Electromyogram Measurements.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2022Article
- How to ValidateFrontiers in medical technology · 2021Article
- In silico trials: Verification, validation and uncertainty quantification of predictive models used in the regulatory evaluation of biomedical products.Methods (San Diego, Calif.) · 2021Article
- Closed-Loop Control for Fluid Resuscitation: Recent Advances and Future Challenges.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2021Review
- Accuracy assessment methods for physiological model selection toward evaluation of closed-loop controlled medical devices.PloS one · 2021Article
- Credibility Assessment of a Subject-Specific Mathematical Model of Blood Volume Kinetics for Prediction of Physiological Response to Hemorrhagic Shock and Fluid Resuscitation.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Article
- TowardsFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Review
- Evaluation of Fluid Resuscitation Control Algorithms via a Hardware-in-the-Loop Test Bed.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2020Article
- Use of Computational Modeling to Study Joint Degeneration: A Review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Review
- Consideration of a Credibility Assessment Framework in Model-Informed Drug Development: Potential Application to Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling and Simulation.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Physiological closed-loop controlled medical devices automatically adjust therapy delivered to a patient to adjust a measured physiological variable. In critical care scenarios, these types of devices could automate, for example, fluid resuscitation, drug delivery, mechanical ventilation, and/or anesthesia and sedation. Evidence from simulations using computational models of physiological systems can play a crucial role in the development of physiological closed-loop controlled devices; but the utility of this evidence will depend on the credibility of the computational model used. Computational models of physiological systems can be complex with numerous non-linearities, time-varying properties, and unknown parameters, which leads to challenges in model assessment. Given the wide range of potential uses of computational patient models in the design and evaluation of physiological closed-loop controlled systems, and the varying risks associated with the diverse uses, the specific model as well as the necessary evidence to make a model credible for a use case may vary. In this review, we examine the various uses of computational patient models in the design and evaluation of critical care physiological closed-loop controlled systems (e.g., hemodynamic stability, mechanical ventilation, anesthetic delivery) as well as the types of evidence (e.g., verification, validation, and uncertainty quantification activities) presented to support the model for that use. We then examine and discuss how a credibility assessment framework (American Society of Mechanical Engineers Verification and Validation Subcommittee, V&V 40 Verification and Validation in Computational Modeling of Medical Devices) for medical devices can be applied to computational patient models used to test physiological closed-loop controlled systems.
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.