ArticlePhilosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences2020
Reducing complexity and unidentifiability when modelling human atrial cells.
Article in Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Computational modeling of cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmogenesis: toward clinical translation.Physiological reviews · 2024Review
- FitMultiCell: simulating and parameterizing computational models of multi-scale and multi-cellular processes.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Neural Network Differential Equations For Ion Channel Modelling.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Article
- Reducing complexity and unidentifiability when modelling human atrial cells.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2020Article
- The fickle heart: uncertainty quantification in cardiac and cardiovascular modelling and simulation.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2020Article
- Data-Driven Uncertainty Quantification for Cardiac Electrophysiological Models: Impact of Physiological Variability on Action Potential and Spiral Wave Dynamics.Frontiers in physiology · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Mathematical models of a cellular action potential (AP) in cardiac modelling have become increasingly complex, particularly in gating kinetics, which control the opening and closing of individual ion channel currents. As cardiac models advance towards use in personalized medicine to inform clinical decision-making, it is critical to understand the uncertainty hidden in parameter estimates from their calibration to experimental data. This study applies approximate Bayesian computation to re-calibrate the gating kinetics of four ion channels in two existing human atrial cell models to their original datasets, providing a measure of uncertainty and indication of potential issues with selecting a single unique value given the available experimental data. Two approaches are investigated to reduce the uncertainty present: re-calibrating the models to a more complete dataset and using a less complex formulation with fewer parameters to constrain. The re-calibrated models are inserted back into the full cell model to study the overall effect on the AP. The use of more complete datasets does not eliminate uncertainty present in parameter estimates. The less complex model, particularly for the fast sodium current, gave a better fit to experimental data alongside lower parameter uncertainty and improved computational speed. This article is part of the theme issue 'Uncertainty quantification in cardiac and cardiovascular modelling and simulation'.
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.