Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36439250›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in physiology2022

Automated model calibration with parallel MCMC: Applications for a cardiovascular system model.

Finbar Argus, Debbie Zhao, Thiranja P Babarenda Gamage, Martyn P Nash, Gonzalo D Maso Talou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

5 authors.

Finbar ArgusAuckland Bioengineering Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Debbie ZhaoAuckland Bioengineering Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Thiranja P Babarenda GamageAuckland Bioengineering Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Martyn P NashAuckland Bioengineering Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Gonzalo D Maso TalouAuckland Bioengineering Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Computational physiological models continue to increase in complexity, however, the task of efficiently calibrating the model to available clinical data remains a significant challenge. One part of this challenge is associated with long calibration times, which present a barrier for the routine application of model-based prediction in clinical practice. Another aspect of this challenge is the limited available data for the unique calibration of complex models. Therefore, to calibrate a patient-specific model, it may be beneficial to verify that task-specific model predictions have acceptable uncertainty, rather than requiring all parameters to be uniquely identified. We have developed a pipeline that reduces the set of fitting parameters to make them structurally identifiable and to improve the efficiency of a subsequent Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) analysis. MCMC was used to find the optimal parameter values and to determine the confidence interval of a task-specific prediction. This approach was demonstrated on numerical experiments where a lumped parameter model of the cardiovascular system was calibrated to brachial artery cuff pressure, echocardiogram volume measurements, and synthetic cerebral blood flow data that approximates what can be obtained from 4D-flow MRI data. This pipeline provides a cerebral arterial pressure prediction that may be useful for determining the risk of hemorrhagic stroke. For a set of three patients, this pipeline successfully reduced the parameter set of a cardiovascular system model from 12 parameters to 8-10 structurally identifiable parameters. This enabled a significant

Indexed as

cerebral pressure estimationcore predictionsidentifiabilityMCMCparameter identificationuncertainty quantification

Identifiers

PMID36439250
PMCPMC9683692

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.