ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2025
Quantifying Experimental Variability in Shear-Induced Hemolysis to Support Uncertainty-Aware Hemolysis Models.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2025. 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.
- Red blood cell deformation in a microfluidic sudden expansion at supraphysiological strain rates.Biophysical journal · 2026Article
- Modeling Red Blood Cell Deformation at Supraphysiological Strain Rates Using a Droplet Framework.Annals of biomedical engineering · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeNumerical hemolysis models rely on experimental data to fit parameters and predict hemolysis under various conditions. However, existing experiments often use few replicates per condition, leaving inherent variability largely unaddressed. This can lead to oversimplified models that fail to capture the true nature of hemolysis. Here, we quantify intra- and inter-donor variability at a single, well-defined shear stress and exposure time and examine how sample size affects measurement precision
methodsHuman blood from five healthy donors was subjected to a fixed shear stress and exposure time condition. For each donor, 20 independent measurements were performed to calculate a hemolysis index (HI). Intra-donor variability (variation within a single donor's measurements) and inter-donor variability (variation between donor means) were compared. Additionally, bootstrap analyses were used to explore the effect of the sample size on the confidence intervals of the mean HI.
resultsIntra-donor variability was approximately four times higher than inter-donor variability, indicating that most of the uncertainty originated from within a single donor's set of samples rather than between donors. Increasing the sample size from 2 to 20 replicates substantially narrowed the confidence intervals of the mean hemolysis estimate, suggesting that commonly used small sample sizes may underrepresent the true variability in hemolysis measurements.
conclusionIntra-donor variability is a significant driver of uncertainty in hemolysis measurements at a fixed shear stress and exposure time condition, surpassing differences among donors. Obtaining robust and reliable hemolysis estimates requires increasing the number of replicate measurements to reduce uncertainty. Integrating these insights into future experimental designs and uncertainty-aware hemolysis models will improve the reliability of in silico predictions and inform safer, more effective blood-contacting medical device designs.
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.