Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40172559›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences2025

Numerical accuracy of closed-loop steady state in a zero-dimensional cardiovascular model.

Nick van Osta, Gitte van den Acker, Tim van Loon, Theo Arts, Tammo Delhaas, Joost Lumens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Numerical accuracy of closed-loop steady state in a zero-dimensional cardiovascular model.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2025
    Article
  3. Preface to the theme issue 'Uncertainty quantification for healthcare and biological systems (Part 2)'.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2025
    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

6 authors.

Nick van OstaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Cardiovascular Research Center Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8927-9110
Gitte van den AckerDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Cardiovascular Research Center Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0005-6304-4371
Tim van LoonDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Cardiovascular Research Center Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Theo ArtsDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Cardiovascular Research Center Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Tammo DelhaasDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Cardiovascular Research Center Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Joost LumensDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Cardiovascular Research Center Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Closed-loop cardiovascular models are becoming vital tools in clinical settings, making their accuracy and reliability paramount. While these models rely heavily on steady-state simulations, accuracy because of steady-state convergence is often assumed negligible. Using a reduced-order cardiovascular model created with the CircAdapt framework as a case study, we investigated steady-state convergence behaviour across various integration methods and simulation protocols. To minimize the effect of numerical errors, we first quantified the numerical errors originating from integration methods and model assumptions. We subsequently investigate this steady-state convergence error under two distinct conditions: first without, and then with homeostatic pressure-flow control (PFC), providing a comprehensive assessment of the CircAdapt framework's numerical stability and accuracy. Our results demonstrated that achieving a clinically accurate steady state required 7-15 heartbeats in simulations without regulatory mechanisms. When homeostatic control mechanisms were included to regulate mean arterial pressure and blood volume, more than twice the number of heartbeats was needed. By simulating a variable number of heartbeats tailored to each simulation's characteristics, an efficient balance between computational cost and steady-state accuracy can be achieved. Understanding this balance is crucial as cardiovascular models progress towards clinical use.This article is part of the theme issue 'Uncertainty quantification for healthcare and biological systems (Part 2)'.

Indexed as

Models, CardiovascularBlood PressureComputer SimulationHeart RateHomeostasisHumansReproducibility of ResultsCircAdapt frameworkcomputer model and simulationcredibility assessmenthuman cardiovascular physiology

Identifiers

PMID40172559
PMCPMC11963903

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.