Engineering Papers⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Boley, L.

Publications and source records attributed to Boley, L..

14 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2018

Comparison of the Integrated Medical Model Predictions to Real World ISS and STS Observations

The Human Research Program funded the development of the integrated medical model (IMM) to quantify the medical component of overall mission risk. The IMM uses Monte Carlo methodology to integrate space flight and ground medical data to assess the probability of mission medical outcomes and resource utilization. To determine the credibility of IMM output the IMM project team completed two validation studies that compare IMM output to observed medical events from a selection of Shuttle Transportation System (STS) and International Space Station (ISS) missions.

validation↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Integrated Medical Model: Outcomes from Independent Review

In 2016, the Integrated Medical Model (IMM) v4.0 underwent an extensive external review in preparation for transition to an operational status. In order to insure impartiality of the review process, the Exploration Medical Capabilities Element of NASA's Human Research Program convened the review through the Systems Review Office at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). The review board convened by GSFC consisted of persons from both NASA and academia with expertise in the fields of statistics, epidemiology, modeling, software development, aerospace medicine, and project management (see Figure 1). The board reviewed software and code standards, as well as evidence pedigree associated with both the input and outcomes information. The board also assesses the models verification, validation, sensitivity to parameters and ability to answer operational questions. This talk will discuss the processes for designing the review, how the review progressed and the findings from the board, as well as summarize the IMM project responses to those findings. Overall, the board found that the IMM is scientifically sound, represents a necessary, comprehensive approach to identifying medical and environmental risks facing astronauts in long duration missions and is an excellent tool for communication between engineers and physicians. The board also found IMM and its customer(s) should convene an additional review of the IMM data sources and to develop a sustainable approach to augment, peer review, and maintain the information utilized in the IMM. The board found this is critically important because medical knowledge continues to evolve. Delivery of IMM v4.0 to the Crew Health and Safety (CHS) Program will occur in the 2017. Once delivered for operational decision support, IMM v4.0 will provide CHS with additional quantitative capability in to assess astronaut medical risks and required medical capabilities to help drive down overall mission risks.

medical equipment↗
NASA NTRS2016

Sensitivity Analysis of the Integrated Medical Model for ISS Programs

Sensitivity analysis estimates the relative contribution of the uncertainty in input values to the uncertainty of model outputs. Partial Rank Correlation Coefficient (PRCC) and Standardized Rank Regression Coefficient (SRRC) are methods of conducting sensitivity analysis on nonlinear simulation models like the Integrated Medical Model (IMM). The PRCC method estimates the sensitivity using partial correlation of the ranks of the generated input values to each generated output value. The partial part is so named because adjustments are made for the linear effects of all the other input values in the calculation of correlation between a particular input and each output. In SRRC, standardized regression-based coefficients measure the sensitivity of each input, adjusted for all the other inputs, on each output. Because the relative ranking of each of the inputs and outputs is used, as opposed to the values themselves, both methods accommodate the nonlinear relationship of the underlying model. As part of the IMM v4.0 validation study, simulations are available that predict 33 person-missions on ISS and 111 person-missions on STS. These simulated data predictions feed the sensitivity analysis procedures. The inputs to the sensitivity procedures include the number occurrences of each of the one hundred IMM medical conditions generated over the simulations and the associated IMM outputs: total quality time lost (QTL), number of evacuations (EVAC), and number of loss of crew lives (LOCL). The IMM team will report the results of using PRCC and SRRC on IMM v4.0 predictions of the ISS and STS missions created as part of the external validation study. Tornado plots will assist in the visualization of the condition-related input sensitivities to each of the main outcomes. The outcomes of this sensitivity analysis will drive review focus by identifying conditions where changes in uncertainty could drive changes in overall model output uncertainty. These efforts are an integral part of the overall verification, validation, and credibility review of IMM v4.0.

medical equipment↗
NASA NTRS2016

Integrated Medical Model (IMM) Optimization Version 4.0 Functional Improvements

The IMMs ability to assess mission outcome risk levels relative to available resources provides a unique capability to provide guidance on optimal operational medical kit and vehicle resources. Post-processing optimization allows IMM to optimize essential resources to improve a specific model outcome such as maximization of the Crew Health Index (CHI), or minimization of the probability of evacuation (EVAC) or the loss of crew life (LOCL). Mass and or volume constrain the optimized resource set. The IMMs probabilistic simulation uses input data on one hundred medical conditions to simulate medical events that may occur in spaceflight, the resources required to treat those events, and the resulting impact to the mission based on specific crew and mission characteristics. Because IMM version 4.0 provides for partial treatment for medical events, IMM Optimization 4.0 scores resources at the individual resource unit increment level as opposed to the full condition-specific treatment set level, as done in version 3.0. This allows the inclusion of as many resources as possible in the event that an entire set of resources called out for treatment cannot satisfy the constraints. IMM Optimization version 4.0 adds capabilities that increase efficiency by creating multiple resource sets based on differing constraints and priorities, CHI, EVAC, or LOCL. It also provides sets of resources that improve mission-related IMM v4.0 outputs with improved performance compared to the prior optimization. The new optimization represents much improved fidelity that will improve the utility of the IMM 4.0 for decision support.

risk assessment↗
NASA NTRS2016

Integrated Mecical Model (IMM) 4.0 Verification and Validation (VV) Testing (HRP IWS 2016)

Timeline, partial treatment, and alternate medications were added to the IMM to improve the fidelity of this model to enhance decision support capabilities. Using standard design reference missions, IMM VV testing compared outputs from the current operational IMM (v3) with those from the model with added functionalities (v4). These new capabilities were examined in a comparative, stepwise approach as follows: a) comparison of the current operational IMM v3 with the enhanced functionality of timeline alone (IMM 4.T), b) comparison of IMM 4.T with the timeline and partial treatment (IMM 4.TPT), and c) comparison of IMM 4.TPT with timeline, partial treatment and alternative medication (IMM 4.0).

risk assessment↗
NASA NTRS2016

Qualitative Validation of the IMM Model for ISS and STS Programs

To validate and further improve the Integrated Medical Model (IMM), medical event data were obtained from 32 ISS and 122 STS person-missions. Using the crew characteristics from these observed missions, IMM v4.0 was used to forecast medical events and medical resource utilization. The IMM medical condition incidence values were compared to the actual observed medical event incidence values, and the IMM forecasted medical resource utilization was compared to actual observed medical resource utilization. Qualitative comparisons of these parameters were conducted for both the ISS and STS programs. The results of these analyses will provide validation of IMM v4.0 and reveal areas of the model requiring adjustments to improve the overall accuracy of IMM outputs. This validation effort should result in enhanced credibility of the IMM and improved confidence in the use of IMM as a decision support tool for human space flight.

risk assessment↗
NASA NTRS2016

Quantitative Validation of the Integrated Medical Model (IMM) for ISS Missions

Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health (LSAH) provided observed medical event data on 33 ISS and 111 STS person-missions for use in further improving and validating the Integrated Medical Model (IMM). Using only the crew characteristics from these observed missions, the newest development version, IMM v4.0, will simulate these missions to predict medical events and outcomes. Comparing IMM predictions to the actual observed medical event counts will provide external validation and identify areas of possible improvement. In an effort to improve the power of detecting differences in this validation study, the total over each program ISS and STS will serve as the main quantitative comparison objective, specifically the following parameters: total medical events (TME), probability of loss of crew life (LOCL), and probability of evacuation (EVAC). Scatter plots of observed versus median predicted TMEs (with error bars reflecting the simulation intervals) will graphically display comparisons while linear regression will serve as the statistical test of agreement. Two scatter plots will be analyzed 1) where each point reflects a mission and 2) where each point reflects a condition-specific total number of occurrences. The coefficient of determination (R2) resulting from a linear regression with no intercept bias (intercept fixed at zero) will serve as an overall metric of agreement between IMM and the real world system (RWS). In an effort to identify as many possible discrepancies as possible for further inspection, the -level for all statistical tests comparing IMM predictions to observed data will be set to 0.1. This less stringent criterion, along with the multiple testing being conducted, should detect all perceived differences including many false positive signals resulting from random variation. The results of these analyses will reveal areas of the model requiring adjustment to improve overall IMM output, which will thereby provide better decision support for mission critical applications.

validation↗
NASA NTRS2015

Integrated Medical Model Project - Overview and Summary of Historical Application

Introduction: The Integrated Medical Model (IMM) Project represents one aspect of NASA's Human Research Program (HRP) to quantitatively assess medical risks to astronauts for existing operational missions as well as missions associated with future exploration and commercial space flight ventures. The IMM takes a probabilistic approach to assessing the likelihood and specific outcomes of one hundred medical conditions within the envelope of accepted space flight standards of care over a selectable range of mission capabilities. A specially developed Integrated Medical Evidence Database (iMED) maintains evidence-based, organizational knowledge across a variety of data sources. Since becoming operational in 2011, version 3.0 of the IMM, the supporting iMED, and the expertise of the IMM project team have contributed to a wide range of decision and informational processes for the space medical and human research community. This presentation provides an overview of the IMM conceptual architecture and range of application through examples of actual space flight community questions posed to the IMM project. Methods: Figure 1 [see document] illustrates the IMM modeling system and scenario process. As illustrated, the IMM computational architecture is based on Probabilistic Risk Assessment techniques. Nineteen assumptions and limitations define the IMM application domain. Scenario definitions include crew medical attributes and mission specific details. The IMM forecasts probabilities of loss of crew life (LOCL), evacuation (EVAC), quality time lost during the mission, number of medical resources utilized and the number and type of medical events by combining scenario information with in-flight, analog, and terrestrial medical information stored in the iMED. In addition, the metrics provide the integrated information necessary to estimate optimized in-flight medical kit contents under constraints of mass and volume or acceptable level of mission risk. Results and Conclusions: Historically, IMM simulations support Science and Technology planning, Exploration mission planning, and ISS program operations by supplying simulation support, iMED data information, and subject matter expertise to Crew Health and Safety and the HRP. Upcoming release of IMM version 4.0 seeks to provide enhanced functionality to increase the quality of risk decisions made using the IMM through a more accurate representation of the real world system.

Myers, J.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Integrated Medical Model Overview

The Integrated Medical Model (IMM) Project represents one aspect of NASA's Human Research Program (HRP) to quantitatively assess medical risks to astronauts for existing operational missions as well as missions associated with future exploration and commercial space flight ventures. The IMM takes a probabilistic approach to assessing the likelihood and specific outcomes of one hundred medical conditions within the envelope of accepted space flight standards of care over a selectable range of mission capabilities. A specially developed Integrated Medical Evidence Database (iMED) maintains evidence-based, organizational knowledge across a variety of data sources. Since becoming operational in 2011, version 3.0 of the IMM, the supporting iMED, and the expertise of the IMM project team have contributed to a wide range of decision and informational processes for the space medical and human research community. This presentation provides an overview of the IMM conceptual architecture and range of application through examples of actual space flight community questions posed to the IMM project.

Spae Adaptation Syndrome↗
NASA NTRS2015

Integrated Medical Model (IMM) Project Verification, Validation, and Credibility (VVandC)

The Integrated Medical Model (IMM) Project supports end user requests by employing the Integrated Medical Evidence Database (iMED) and IMM tools as well as subject matter expertise within the Project. The iMED houses data used by the IMM. The IMM is designed to forecast relative changes for a specified set of crew health and mission success risk metrics by using a probabilistic model based on historical data, cohort data, and subject matter expert opinion. A stochastic approach is taken because deterministic results would not appropriately reflect the uncertainty in the IMM inputs. Once the IMM was conceptualized, a plan was needed to rigorously assess input information, framework and code, and output results of the IMM, and ensure that end user requests and requirements were considered during all stages of model development and implementation, as well as lay the foundation for external review and application. METHODS: In 2008, the Project team developed a comprehensive verification and validation (VV) plan, which specified internal and external review criteria encompassing 1) verification of data and IMM structure to ensure proper implementation of the IMM, 2) several validation techniques to confirm that the simulation capability of the IMM appropriately represents occurrences and consequences of medical conditions during space missions, and 3) credibility processes to develop user confidence in the information derived from the IMM. When the NASA-STD-7009 (7009) [1] was published, the Project team updated their verification, validation, and credibility (VVC) project plan to meet 7009 requirements and include 7009 tools in reporting VVC status of the IMM. Construction of these tools included meeting documentation and evidence requirements sufficient to meet external review success criteria. RESULTS: IMM Project VVC updates are compiled recurrently and include updates to the 7009 Compliance and Credibility matrices. Reporting tools have evolved over the lifetime of the IMM Project to better communicate VVC status. This has included refining original 7009 methodology with augmentation from the HRP NASA-STD-7009 Guidance Document working group and the NASA-HDBK-7009 [2]. End user requests and requirements are being satisfied as evidenced by ISS Program acceptance of IMM risk forecasts, transition to an operational model and simulation tool, and completion of service requests from a broad end user consortium including operations, science and technology planning, and exploration planning. IMM v4.0 is slated for operational release in the FY015 and current VVC assessments illustrate the expected VVC status prior to the completion of customer lead external review efforts. CONCLUSIONS: The VVC approach established by the IMM Project of incorporating Project-specific recommended practices and guidelines for implementing the 7009 requirements is comprehensive and includes the involvement of end users at every stage in IMM evolution. Methods and techniques used to quantify the VVC status of the IMM Project represented a critical communication tool in providing clear and concise suitability assessments to IMM customers. These processes have not only received approval from the local NASA community but have also garnered recognition by other federal agencies seeking to develop similar guidelines in the medical modeling community.

Walton, M.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Can Simulation Credibility Be Improved Using Sensitivity Analysis to Understand Input Data Effects on Model Outcome?

Model and simulation (MS) credibility is defined as, the quality to elicit belief or trust in MS results. NASA-STD-7009 [1] delineates eight components (Verification, Validation, Input Pedigree, Results Uncertainty, Results Robustness, Use History, MS Management, People Qualifications) that address quantifying model credibility, and provides guidance to the model developers, analysts, and end users for assessing the MS credibility. Of the eight characteristics, input pedigree, or the quality of the data used to develop model input parameters, governing functions, or initial conditions, can vary significantly. These data quality differences have varying consequences across the range of MS application. NASA-STD-7009 requires that the lowest input data quality be used to represent the entire set of input data when scoring the input pedigree credibility of the model. This requirement provides a conservative assessment of model inputs, and maximizes the communication of the potential level of risk of using model outputs. Unfortunately, in practice, this may result in overly pessimistic communication of the MS output, undermining the credibility of simulation predictions to decision makers. This presentation proposes an alternative assessment mechanism, utilizing results parameter robustness, also known as model input sensitivity, to improve the credibility scoring process for specific simulations.

Credibility↗