Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34993187›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2021

Realistic Reference for Evaluation of Vehicle Safety Focusing on Pedestrian Head Protection Observed From Kinematic Reconstruction of Real-World Collisions.

Guibing Li, Jinming Liu, Kui Li, Hui Zhao, Liangliang Shi, Shuai Zhang, Jin Nie

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Guibing LiSchool of Mechanical Engineering, Hunan University of Science and Technology, Xiangtan, China.
Jinming LiuSchool of Mechanical Engineering, Hunan University of Science and Technology, Xiangtan, China.
Kui LiChongqing Key Laboratory of Vehicle Crash/Bio-Impact and Traffic Safety, Institute for Traffic Medicine, Daping Hospital, Army Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Hui ZhaoChongqing Key Laboratory of Vehicle Crash/Bio-Impact and Traffic Safety, Institute for Traffic Medicine, Daping Hospital, Army Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Liangliang ShiChina Automotive Engineering Research Institute Co., Ltd., Chongqing, China.
Shuai ZhangThe Fifth Institute of Army Academy, Wuxi, China.
Jin NieLoudi Vocational and Technical College, Loudi, China.
Hunan University of Science and Technology · CNArmy Medical University · CNChina Automotive Engineering Research Institute · CNDaping Hospital · CNLoudi Central Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Head-to-vehicle contact boundary condition and criteria and corresponding thresholds of head injuries are crucial in evaluation of vehicle safety performance for pedestrian protection, which need a constantly updated understanding of pedestrian head kinematic response and injury risk in real-world collisions. Thus, the purpose of the current study is to investigate the characteristics of pedestrian head-to-vehicle contact boundary condition and pedestrian AIS3+ (Abbreviated Injury Scale) head injury risk as functions of kinematic-based criteria, including HIC (Head Injury Criterion), HIP (Head Impact Power), GAMBIT (Generalized Acceleration Model for Brain Injury Threshold), RIC (Rotational Injury Criterion), and BrIC (Brain Injury Criteria), in real-world collisions. To achieve this, 57 vehicle-to-pedestrian collision cases were employed, and a multi-body modeling approach was applied to reconstruct pedestrian kinematics in these real-world collisions. The results show that head-to-windscreen contacts are dominant in pedestrian collisions of the analysis sample and that head WAD (Wrap Around Distance) floats from 1.5 to 2.3 m, with a mean value of 1.84 m; 80% of cases have a head linear contact velocity below 45 km/h or an angular contact velocity less than 40 rad/s; pedestrian head linear contact velocity is on average 83 ± 23% of the vehicle impact velocity, while the head angular contact velocity (in rad/s) is on average 75 ± 25% of the vehicle impact velocity in km/h; 77% of cases have a head contact time in the range 50-140 ms, and negative and positive linear correlations are observed for the relationships between pedestrian head contact time and WAD/height ratio and vehicle impact velocity, respectively; 70% of cases have a head contact angle floating from 40° to 70°, with an average value of 53°; the pedestrian head contact angles on windscreens (average = 48°) are significantly lower than those on bonnets (average = 60°); the predicted thresholds of HIC, HIP, GAMBIT, RIC, BrIC2011, and BrIC2013 for a 50% probability of AIS3+ head injury risk are 1,300, 60 kW, 0.74, 1,470 × 10

Indexed as

boundary conditioninjury riskkinematic reconstructionpedestrian head-to-vehicle contactreal-world accidents

Identifiers

PMID34993187
PMCPMC8724547
OpenAlexW4200368748

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.