ArticleJournal of biomechanical engineering2026
Integrating Uncertainty Quantification into Computational Fluid Dynamics Models of Coronary Arteries Under Steady Flow.
Article in Journal of biomechanical engineering, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations are increasingly being integrated into clinical medicine, where they have the potential to support clinicians in disease diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. However, these models frequently use deterministic approaches, neglecting inherent variability (or uncertainty) in input parameters, thereby undermining model credibility and limiting clinical adoption. Herein, we integrate modern and certifiable uncertainty quantification techniques to characterize and quantify the variability in coronary artery wall shear stress (WSS) under steady-flow conditions due to intrinsic uncertainty in model-dependent quantities. Univariate probability distributions were fitted to hemodynamic parameters (density, pressure, radius, velocity, and viscosity), and sampled parameter ensembles were applied to an analytical solution (Poiseuille flow) and a patient-specific coronary artery model. Results from the analytical solution demonstrated that variability in input parameters propagated into uncertainty in WSS values, with uncertainty in velocity accounting for the majority (∼81%) of WSS variability. In the patient-specific model, spatial medians in WSS varied by ∼50% due to input parameter uncertainties, with viscosity (∼59%) and velocity (∼40%) emerging as the dominant contributors to WSS variability. Across each use case, unary interactions dominated (i.e., first-order Sobol indices accounted for the majority of the variance), contributing to ∼93% and ∼99% of the total WSS variance in the analytical and patient-specific model, respectively. Collectively, this study establishes an uncertainty-aware framework to strengthen computational biomechanics model credibility, aligning with emerging regulatory guidance and enabling more trustworthy modeling-based decision support in the management of coronary artery disease.
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.