ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2022
Protective Performance of Helmets and Goggles in Mitigating Brain Biomechanical Response to Primary Blast Exposure.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing foam padding of the advanced combat helmet to maximize protection of blast-induced brain injury and wearing comfort.Advances in engineering software (Barking, London, England : 1992) · 2025Article
- Computational Modelling of Protected and Unprotected Head Impacts in Rugby.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Twenty Years of Blast-Induced Neurotrauma: Current State of Knowledge.Neurotrauma reports · 2024Article
- In-Depth Bicycle Collision Reconstruction: From a Crash Helmet to Brain Injury Evaluation.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Non-Lethal Blasts can Generate Cavitation in Cerebrospinal Fluid While Severe Helmeted Impacts Cannot: A Novel Mechanism for Blast Brain Injury.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Oblique impact responses of Hybrid III and a new headform with more biofidelic coefficient of friction and moments of inertia.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The current combat helmets are primarily designed to mitigate blunt impacts and ballistic loadings. Their protection against primary blast wave is not well studied. In this paper, we comprehensively assessed the protective capabilities of the advanced combat helmet and goggles against blast waves with different intensity and directions. Using a high-fidelity human head model, we compared the intracranial pressure (ICP), cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cavitation, and brain strain and strain rate predicted from bare head, helmet-head and helmet-goggles-head simulations. The helmet was found to be effective in mitigating the positive ICP (24-57%) and strain rate (5-34%) in all blast scenarios. Goggles were found to be effective in mitigating the positive ICP in frontal (6-16%) and lateral (5-7%) blast exposures. However, the helmet and goggles had minimal effects on mitigating CSF cavitation and even increased brain strain. Further investigation showed that wearing a helmet leads to higher risk of cavitation. In addition, their presence increased the head kinetic energy, leading to larger strains in the brain. Our findings can improve our understanding of the protective effects of helmets and goggles and guide the design of helmet pads to mitigate brain responses to blast.
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.