SynthesisJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2026
Artificial intelligence in computational modeling of thrombosis: Bridging mechanistic insights and clinical translation.
Synthesis in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- External validation of established clinical risk scores for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism in a Brazilian registry.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Thrombosis presents significant healthcare challenges due to its complex nature. Recent advancements in data-driven mathematical and computational models of blood clot formation offer promising insights. The integration of machine learning (ML) and computational methods in thrombosis research is still in its early stages, but it could leverage the strengths of both approaches. This systematic review followed the PRISMA methodology to assess studies that (i) utilized computational models, (ii) modeled blood clot formation or thrombin generation through the coagulation cascade, and (iii) incorporated ML algorithms. We identified 11 eligible studies that focused on platelet signaling, outcome prediction, thrombin threshold prediction, shear rate prediction, and multiscale modeling. Artificial neural networks and support vector machines were the most commonly used ML models. The hybrid approach combining ML and computational models is still nascent but shows significant promise for advancing thrombosis research. These models offer valuable insights for improving thrombosis diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment, particularly in the context of personalized medicine for hemostatic disorders. The integration of ML with computational models holds great potential for improving thrombosis management, but further research is needed. Future work should focus on enhancing the physiological realism of these models, incorporating patient-specific data, and addressing challenges related to data standardization and clinical implementation. The field is in its early stages but shows promising growth potential and is well positioned to advance precision medicine approaches in thrombosis and hemostatic disorders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41405754What 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.