MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.medcli.2026.107639

Медицинская библиотека · Medicina clinica · 2026

Agent-based simulation and digital twins in heart failure care: Current evidence, validation and implementation barriers.

Epelde Francisco, Rexachs Dolores, Wong Álvaro, Luque Emilio

СтатьяОбзорПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

Heart failure (HF) requires coordinated care across home, ambulatory, emergency, inpatient and hospital-at-home settings. Agent-based models (ABM), discrete-event simulation (DES) and digital twins (DT) have been proposed to support service design and individualized decisions, but their clinical maturity is uncertain. We performed a narrative review, updated through 31 July 2026, separating established clinical evidence for HF care models from HF-specific computational evidence and extrapolated cardiovascular DT literature. The evidence map includes nine representative HF-specific computational studies: four agent-based or hybrid systems, one DES model and four DT-oriented studies. Most were conceptual, simulation-based, retrospective or proof-of-concept; only a small number included external or invasive-reference validation, and none established routine DT-guided clinical care. Current evidence supports ABM/DES mainly for hypothesis generation and service design. HF digital twins remain investigational. Prospective validation, interoperability, recalibration, cybersecurity, workflow integration, cost-effectiveness and digital equity are prerequisites before clinical implementation.

Для цитирования: Epelde Francisco, Rexachs Dolores, Wong Álvaro, Luque Emilio. Agent-based simulation and digital twins in heart failure care: Current evidence, validation and implementation barriers.. Medicina clinica. 2026. DOI: 10.1016/j.medcli.2026.107639.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.