ArticleScientific reports2021
The dynamic impact behavior of the human neurocranium.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Experimental determination of the stabbing intensity in an intracranial stabbing death.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Investigating mechanical properties for developing a human infant cranial bone surrogate in pediatric craniofacial surgery.Heliyon · 2024Article
- The emerging importance of skull-brain interactions in traumatic brain injury.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Realistic biomechanical models of the human head should accurately reflect the mechanical properties of all neurocranial bones. Previous studies predominantly focused on static testing setups, males, restricted age ranges and scarcely investigated the temporal area. This given study determined the biomechanical properties of 64 human neurocranial samples (age range of 3 weeks to 94 years) using testing velocities of 2.5, 3.0 and 3.5 m/s in a three-point bending setup. Maximum forces were higher with increasing testing velocities (p ≤ 0.031) but bending strengths only revealed insignificant increases (p ≥ 0.052). The maximum force positively correlated with the sample thickness (p ≤ 0.012 at 2.0 m/s and 3.0 m/s) and bending strength negatively correlated with both age (p ≤ 0.041) and sample thickness (p ≤ 0.036). All parameters were independent of sex (p ≥ 0.120) apart from a higher bending strength of females (p = 0.040) for the 3.5 -m/s group. All parameters were independent of the post mortem interval (p ≥ 0.061). This study provides novel insights into the dynamic mechanical properties of distinct neurocranial bones over an age range spanning almost one century. It is concluded that the former are age-, site- and thickness-dependent, whereas sex dependence needs further investigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.