Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36561284›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medical technology2022

Analysis identifying minimal governing parameters for clinically accurate

Cyrus Tanade, S James Chen, Jane A Leopold, Amanda Randles

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medical technology, 2022. 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
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Identifying When Steady-State Flow Simulations In Patient-Specific Coronaries Recapitulate Pulsatile Flow Dynamics.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 2024
    Article
  7. Cloud Computing to Enable Wearable-Driven Longitudinal Hemodynamic Maps.International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis : [proceedings]. SC (Conference : Supercomputing) · 2023
    Article
  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

4 authors.

Cyrus TanadeDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.
S James ChenDepartment of Medicine, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, United States.
Jane A LeopoldDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.
Amanda RandlesDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.

Funding

Intergrated Endothelial Phenotyping to Redefine Pulmonary HypertensionU01HL125215 · NHLBI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI LEOPOLD, JANE A, WAXMAN, AARON B · 2014 to 2018
$1.7M
Technology for efficient simulation of cancer cell transportU01CA253511 · NCI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI RANDLES, AMANDA E · 2020 to 2022
$1.1M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA253511NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL125215
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Personalized hemodynamic models can accurately compute fractional flow reserve (FFR) from coronary angiograms and clinical measurements (FFR Aims: To determine the minimum set of patient-specific inputs to compute FFR using invasive measurement of FFR (FFR Materials and Methods: Personalized coronary geometries ( Results: FFR Conclusion: Streamlined models could match the diagnostic performance of the baseline with a full gamut of patient-specific measurements. Capturing coronary hemodynamics depended most on accurate geometry reconstruction and cardiac output measurement.

Indexed as

computational fluid dynamicsfractional flow reservepatient-specific modelingsensitivity analysisSobol analysisuncertainty quantication

Identifiers

PMID36561284
PMCPMC9764219

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.