4.6 Article

Uncertainty and variability in computational and mathematical models of cardiac physiology

Journal

JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-LONDON
Volume 594, Issue 23, Pages 6833-6847

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1113/JP271671

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Wellcome Trust [101222/Z/13/Z]
  2. Royal Society [101222/Z/13/Z]
  3. UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/K037145/1, EP/L001101/1]
  4. EPSRC [EP/L001101/1, EP/K037145/1, EP/N014391/1, EP/I017909/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/N014391/1, EP/K037145/1, EP/L001101/1, EP/I017909/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. Wellcome Trust [101222/A/13/Z] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Cardiac Physiome effort is one of the most mature and successful applications of mathematical and computational modelling for describing and advancing the understanding of physiology. After five decades of development, physiological cardiac models are poised to realise the promise of translational research via clinical applications such as drug development and patient-specific approaches as well as ablation, cardiac resynchronisation and contractility modulation therapies. For models to be included as a vital component of the decision process in safety-critical applications, rigorous assessment of model credibility will be required. This White Paper describes one aspect of this process by identifying and classifying sources of variability and uncertainty in models as well as their implications for the application and development of cardiac models. We stress the need to understand and quantify the sources of variability and uncertainty in model inputs, and the impact of model structure and complexity and their consequences for predictive model outputs. We propose that the future of the Cardiac Physiome should include a probabilistic approach to quantify the relationship of variability and uncertainty of model inputs and outputs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available