ALBERT

Description: 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.

Description: No abstract available

Description: 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.

Description: 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.

Description: 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.

Description: 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.

Description: 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.

Description: No abstract available