ArticleIEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering2020
Evaluation of Fluid Resuscitation Control Algorithms via a Hardware-in-the-Loop Test Bed.
Article in IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Regulatory Adoption of AI, ML, Computational Modeling & Simulation in In-Silico Clinical Trials for Medical Devices: A Systematic Review.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Pooled it
- Comparison of Controller Logics for Automating Vasopressor Administration Using a Hardware-in-Loop Test Platform.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Comparative Assessment of In Vivo and In Silico Evaluation of Automated Fluid Resuscitation Controllers.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Safe automation of interfering medical treatments via control barrier functions and reachability analysis: a fluid resuscitation-sedation-vasopressor infusion case study.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2025Article
- In Vivo Evaluation of Two Hemorrhagic Shock Resuscitation Controllers with Non-Invasive, Intermittent Sensors.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- 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
- Article
- Hardware-in-Loop Comparison of Physiological Closed-Loop Controllers for the Autonomous Management of Hypotension.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- An Automated Hardware-in-Loop Testbed for Evaluating Hemorrhagic Shock Resuscitation Controllers.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Closed-Loop Controlled Fluid Administration Systems: A Comprehensive Scoping Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Evaluation of a Proportional-Integral-Derivative Controller for Hemorrhage Resuscitation Using a Hardware-in-Loop Test Platform.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Model-based approach to investigate equipment-induced error in pressure-waveform derived hemodynamic measurements.Physiological measurement · 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
- Closed-Loop Control for Fluid Resuscitation: Recent Advances and Future Challenges.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis paper presents a hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) testing platform for evaluating the performance of fluid resuscitation control algorithms. The proposed platform is a cyber-physical system that integrates physical devices with computational models and computer-based algorithms.
methodsThe HIL test bed is evaluated against in silico and in vivo data to ensure the hemodynamic variables are appropriately predicted in the proposed platform. The test bed is then used to investigate the performance of two fluid resuscitation control algorithms: a decision table (rule-based) and a proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controller.
resultsThe statistical evaluation of test bed indicates that similar results are observed in the HIL test bed, in silico implementation, and the in vivo data, verifying that the HIL test bed can adequately predict the hemodynamic responses. Comparison of the two fluid resuscitation controllers reveals that both controllers stabilized hemodynamic variables over time and had similar speed to efficiently achieve the target level of the hemodynamic endpoint. However, the accuracy of the PID controller was higher than the rule-based for the scenarios tested in the HIL platform.
conclusionThe results demonstrate the potential of the HIL test bed for realistic testing of physiologic controllers by incorporating physical devices with computational models of physiology and disturbances. SIGNIFICANCE: This type of testing enables relatively fast evaluation of physiologic closed-loop control systems to aid in iterative design processes and offers complementary means to existing techniques (e.g., in silico, in vivo, and clinical studies) for testing of such systems against a wide range of disturbances and scenarios.
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.