Engineering Papers⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Goodenow, D. A.

Publications and source records attributed to Goodenow, D. A..

6 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

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↗