ArticleComputers in biology and medicine2025
Hybrid physics-based and data-driven modeling of vascular bifurcation pressure differences.
Article in Computers in biology and medicine, 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.
- A Statistical Shape Modeling Approach for the Derivation of a Data-Driven Geometry-Aware Lumped Arterial Stenosis Model.International journal for numerical methods in biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- svZeroDSolver: A modular package for lumped-parameter cardiovascular simulations.Journal of open source software · 2025Article
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
Reduced-order models allow for the simulation of blood flow in patient-specific vasculatures. They offer a significant reduction in computational cost and wait time compared to traditional computational fluid dynamics models. Unfortunately, due to the simplifications made in their formulations, reduced-order models can suffer from significantly reduced accuracy. One common simplifying assumption is that of continuity of static or total pressure over vascular bifurcations. In many cases, this assumption has been shown to introduce significant errors in pressure predictions. We propose a model to account for this pressure difference, with the ultimate goal of increasing the accuracy of cardiovascular reduced-order models. Our model successfully uses a structure common in existing reduced-order models in conjunction with machine-learning techniques to predict the pressure difference over a vascular bifurcation. We analyze the performance of our model on steady and transient flows, testing it on three bifurcation cohorts representing three different bifurcation geometric types. We find that our model makes significantly more accurate predictions than other models for approximating bifurcation pressure losses commonly used in the reduced-order cardiovascular modeling community. We also compare the efficacy of different machine-learning techniques and observe that a neural network performs most robustly. Additionally, we consider two different model modalities: one in which the model is fit using both steady and transient flows, and one in which it is optimized for performance in transient flows. We discuss the trade-off between the physical interpretability associated with the first option and the improved accuracy in transient flows associated with the latter option. We also demonstrate the model's ability to generalize by testing it on a combined dataset containing two different bifurcation types. This work marks a step towards improving the accuracy of cardiovascular reduced-order models, thereby increasing their utility for cardiovascular flow modeling.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.