ArticleBiomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology2026
Towards personalization of 1D blood flow models: sensitivity analysis and parameter calibration.
Article in Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this work, we address one of the central challenges in translational computational hemodynamics: how to effectively individualize cardiovascular models in scenarios where patient data are scarce and the parameter space is large. We propose an approach to construct patient-specific 1D blood flow models from patient data; specifically, the methodology relies on calibrating model parameters using a limited set of flow rate and pressure measurements. As a model to describe the systemic circulation, we adopt a simplified version of the Anatomically Detailed Arterial Network model which is combined with a Covariance Matrix Adaptation Evolutionary Strategy (CMA-ES) to find the best set of parameters that minimize the discrepancy metric between model prediction and available measurements. The calibration problem is addressed in two steps. In the first one, the influence of each physical parameter on the personalization process is quantified via an exhaustive global sensitivity analysis. Then, CMA-ES is employed to estimate the optimal model parameters. The findings of this study demonstrate the feasibility of deriving accurate patient-specific models in a setting characterized by small data and a high-dimensional parameter space. Furthermore, we provide a comprehensive analysis of the regional impact of physical parameters on the waveform characterization and their potential impact on clinically relevant biomarkers.
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.