Key result
Discrete clinical measurements reduce system sloppiness and yield fewer personalizable biomarkers than continuous measures.
Why the study?
To employ reduced-order cardiovascular models as digital twins for personalised medicine, it is necessary to understand how input parameter uncertainties affect model outputs and how experimental design influences system sloppiness.
The choice of experimental design (continuous vs discrete clinical measures) significantly impacts cardiovascular model personalization and system sloppiness.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Measurement choice may affect cardiovascular model personalization; leaves open optimal strategies for digital twins.
To employ a reduced-order cardiovascular model as a digital twin for personalised medicine, it is essential to understand how uncertainties in the model's input parameters affect its outputs. The aim is to identify a set of input parameters that can serve as clinical biomarkers, providing insight into a patient's physiological state. Given the challenge of finding useful clinical data, careful consideration must be given to the experimental design used to acquire patient-specific input parameters. Model sloppiness-where numerous parameter combinations have minimal impact on model predictions, whilst only a few parameters significantly influence outcomes-is a critical concept in this context. In this paper, we conduct the first quantification of a cardiovascular system's sloppiness to elucidate the structure of the input parameter space. By utilising Sobol indices and examining various synthetic cardiovascular measures with increasing invasiveness, we uncover how the personalisation process and the cardiovascular system's sloppiness are contingent upon the chosen experimental design. Our findings reveal that continuous clinical measures induce system sloppiness and increase the number of personalisable biomarkers, whereas discrete clinical measurements produce a non-sloppy system with a reduced number of biomarkers. This study underscores the necessity for careful consideration of available clinical data as differing measurement sets can significantly impact model personalisation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saxton et al. (2025) studied Cardiovascular modeling. Continuous vs discrete clinical measurements was evaluated. Continuous clinical measures induce system sloppiness and increase the number of personalisable biomarkers, whereas discrete clinical measurements produce a non-sloppy system with a reduced number of biomarkers.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: