ArticleIEEE access : practical innovations, open solutions2024
A Lumped-Parameter Model of the Cardiovascular System Response for Evaluating Automated Fluid Resuscitation Systems.
Article in IEEE access : practical innovations, open solutions, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Assessment of In Vivo and In Silico Evaluation of Automated Fluid Resuscitation Controllers.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Integrated lumped parameter modeling of cardiac-vascular interaction with valve dynamics and ventricular pressure-volume.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Physiological closed-loop controlled (PCLC) medical devices, such as those designed for blood pressure regulation, can be tested for safety and efficacy in real-world clinical settings. However, relying solely on limited animal and clinical studies may not capture the diverse range of physiological conditions. Credible mathematical models can complement these studies by allowing the testing of the device against simulated patient scenarios. This research involves the development and validation of a low-order lumped-parameter mathematical model of the cardiovascular system's response to fluid perturbation. The model takes rates of hemorrhage and fluid infusion as inputs and provides hematocrit and blood volume, heart rate, stroke volume, cardiac output and mean arterial blood pressure as outputs. The model was calibrated using data from 27 sheep subjects, and its predictive capability was evaluated through a leave-one-out cross-validation procedure, followed by independent validation using 12 swine subjects. Our findings showed small model calibration error against the training dataset, with the normalized root-mean-square error (NRMSE) less than 10% across all variables. The mathematical model and virtual patient cohort generation tool demonstrated a high level of predictive capability and successfully generated a sufficient number of subjects that closely resembled the test dataset. The average NRMSE for the best virtual subject, across two distinct samples of virtual subjects, was below 12.7% and 11.9% for the leave-one-out cross-validation and independent validation dataset. These findings suggest that the model and virtual cohort generator are suitable for simulating patient populations under fluid perturbation, indicating their potential value in PCLC medical device evaluation.
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.