Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32041606›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2020

Integration of mathematical model predictions into routine workflows to support clinical decision making in haematology.

Katja Hoffmann, Katja Cazemier, Christoph Baldow, Silvio Schuster, Yuri Kheifetz, Sibylle Schirm, Matthias Horn, Thomas Ernst, Constanze Volgmann, Christian Thiede and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract readVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Finding new edges: systems approaches to MTOR signaling.Biochemical Society transactions · 2021
    Review
  8. Review
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

17 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Katja HoffmannInstitute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Katja CazemierInstitute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Christoph BaldowInstitute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Silvio SchusterInstitute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Yuri KheifetzInstitute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Sibylle SchirmInstitute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Matthias HornInstitute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Thomas ErnstAbteilung Hämatologie/Onkologie, Klinik für Innere Medizin II, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Germany.
Constanze VolgmannAbteilung Hämatologie/Onkologie, Klinik für Innere Medizin II, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Germany.
Christian ThiedeDepartment of Internal Medicine, Medical Clinic I, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Andreas HochhausAbteilung Hämatologie/Onkologie, Klinik für Innere Medizin II, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Germany.
Martin BornhäuserDepartment of Internal Medicine, Medical Clinic I, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Meinolf SuttorpPediatric Hematology and Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Markus ScholzInstitute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Ingmar GlaucheInstitute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Markus LoefflerInstitute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Ingo RoederInstitute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany. ingo.roeder@tu-dresden.de.ORCID 0000-0002-6741-0608
University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus · DELeipzig University · DEKlinikum Magdeburg · DENational Center for Tumor Diseases · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndividualization and patient-specific optimization of treatment is a major goal of modern health care. One way to achieve this goal is the application of high-resolution diagnostics together with the application of targeted therapies. However, the rising number of different treatment modalities also induces new challenges: Whereas randomized clinical trials focus on proving average treatment effects in specific groups of patients, direct conclusions at the individual patient level are problematic. Thus, the identification of the best patient-specific treatment options remains an open question. Systems medicine, specifically mechanistic mathematical models, can substantially support individual treatment optimization. In addition to providing a better general understanding of disease mechanisms and treatment effects, these models allow for an identification of patient-specific parameterizations and, therefore, provide individualized predictions for the effect of different treatment modalities.

resultsIn the following we describe a software framework that facilitates the integration of mathematical models and computer simulations into routine clinical processes to support decision-making. This is achieved by combining standard data management and data exploration tools, with the generation and visualization of mathematical model predictions for treatment options at an individual patient level.

conclusionsBy integrating model results in an audit trail compatible manner into established clinical workflows, our framework has the potential to foster the use of systems-medical approaches in clinical practice. We illustrate the framework application by two use cases from the field of haematological oncology.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationDecision Support Systems, ClinicalHematologic DiseasesModels, TheoreticalSoftwareWorkflowClinical Decision-MakingHumansProof of Concept StudyClinical decision-makingComputer simulationData managementHaematologyIndividual therapy planningMathematical modellingModel-based treatment optimizationRoutine workflowSupport system

Identifiers

PMID32041606
PMCPMC7011438
OpenAlexW3010352478

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.