ReviewJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2024
Accelerated simulation methodologies for computational vascular flow modelling.
Review in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Neural-Operator Surrogate for Platelet Deformation Across Capillary Numbers.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Advances in Machine Learning Models for Healthcare Applications: A Precise and Patient-Centric Approach.Current pharmaceutical design · 2025Review
- Reconstructing blood flow in data-poor regimes: a vasculature network kernel for Gaussian process regression.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vascular flow modelling can improve our understanding of vascular pathologies and aid in developing safe and effective medical devices. Vascular flow models typically involve solving the nonlinear Navier-Stokes equations in complex anatomies and using physiological boundary conditions, often presenting a multi-physics and multi-scale computational problem to be solved. This leads to highly complex and expensive models that require excessive computational time. This review explores accelerated simulation methodologies, specifically focusing on computational vascular flow modelling. We review reduced order modelling (ROM) techniques like zero-/one-dimensional and modal decomposition-based ROMs and machine learning (ML) methods including ML-augmented ROMs, ML-based ROMs and physics-informed ML models. We discuss the applicability of each method to vascular flow acceleration and the effectiveness of the method in addressing domain-specific challenges. When available, we provide statistics on accuracy and speed-up factors for various applications related to vascular flow simulation acceleration. Our findings indicate that each type of model has strengths and limitations depending on the context. To accelerate real-world vascular flow problems, we propose future research on developing multi-scale acceleration methods capable of handling the significant geometric variability inherent to such problems.
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.