Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34062102›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2021

The relationship between brain injury criteria and brain strain across different types of head impacts can be different.

Xianghao Zhan, Yiheng Li, Yuzhe Liu, August G Domel, Hossein Vahid Alizadeh, Samuel J Raymond, Jesse Ruan, Saeed Barbat, Stephen Tiernan, Olivier Gevaert and 3 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Quantitative video analysis of head acceleration events: a review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Xianghao ZhanDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Yiheng LiDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Yuzhe LiuDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
August G DomelDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Hossein Vahid AlizadehDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Samuel J RaymondDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Jesse RuanFord Motor Company, 3001 Miller Road, Dearborn, MI 48120, USA.
Saeed BarbatFord Motor Company, 3001 Miller Road, Dearborn, MI 48120, USA.
Stephen TiernanTechnological University Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Olivier GevaertDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Michael M ZeinehDepartment of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Gerald A GrantDepartment of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
David B CamarilloDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Stanford University · USFord Motor Company (United States) · USTechnological University Dublin · IE

Funding

Disseminating a validated mouthguard sensor to investigate the effect of head impacts on brain healthR24NS098518 · NINDS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI CAMARILLO, DAVID, GRANT, GERALD ARTHUR · 2018 to 2021
$1.1M
NINDS NIH HHS R24 NS098518
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiple brain injury criteria (BIC) are developed to quickly quantify brain injury risks after head impacts. These BIC originated from different head impact types (e.g. sports and car crashes) are widely used in risk evaluation. However, the accuracy of using the BIC on brain injury risk estimation across head impact types has not been evaluated. Physiologically, brain strain is often considered the key parameter of brain injury. To evaluate the BIC's risk estimation accuracy across five datasets comprising different head impact types, linear regression was used to model 95% maximum principal strain, 95% maximum principal strain at the corpus callosum and cumulative strain damage (15%) on 18 BIC. The results show significantly different relationships between BIC and brain strain across datasets, indicating the same BIC value may suggest different brain strain across head impact types. The accuracy of brain strain regression is generally decreasing if the BIC regression models are fitted on a dataset with a different type of head impact rather than on the dataset with the same type. Given this finding, this study raises concerns for applying BIC to estimate the brain injury risks for head impacts different from the head impacts on which the BIC was developed.

Indexed as

Brain InjuriesHeadBiomechanical PhenomenaBrainFinite Element AnalysisHumansLinear Modelsbrain injury criteriabrain strainhead impacttraumatic brain injury

Identifiers

PMID34062102
PMCPMC8169213
OpenAlexW3165194013

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.