ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2022
American Football Helmet Effectiveness Against a Strain-Based Concussion Mechanism.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Evaluation of Tentorium and Brainstem Influences on Intracranial Displacements and Strains.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Peaks and Distributions of White Matter Tract-related Strains in Bicycle Helmeted Impacts: Implication for Helmet Ranking and Optimization.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Efficient Generation of Pretraining Samples for Developing a Deep Learning Brain Injury Model via Transfer Learning.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2024Article
- Potential of Soft-Shelled Rugby Headgear to Lower Regional Brain Strain Metrics During Standard Drop Tests.Sports medicine - open · 2024Article
- Physiological and Biomechanical Monitoring in American Football Players: A Scoping Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Brain strain is increasingly being used in helmet design and safety performance evaluation as it is generally considered as the primary mechanism of concussion. In this study, we investigate whether different helmet designs can meaningfully alter brain strains using two commonly used metrics, peak maximum principal strain (MPS) of the whole brain and cumulative strain damage measure (CSDM). A convolutional neural network (CNN) that instantly produces detailed brain strains is first tested for accuracy for helmeted head impacts. Based on N = 144 impacts in 12 impact conditions from three random and representative helmet models, we conclude that the CNN is sufficiently accurate for helmet testing applications, for elementwise MPS (success rate of 98.6%), whole-brain peak MPS and CSDM (coefficient of determination of 0.977 and 0.980, with root mean squared error of 0.015 and 0.029, respectively). We then apply the technique to 23 football helmet models (N = 1104 impacts) to reproduce elementwise MPS. Assuming a concussion would occur when peak MPS or CSDM exceeds a threshold, we sweep their thresholds across the value ranges to evaluate the number of predicted hypothetical concussions that different helmets sustain across the impact conditions. Relative to the 12 impact conditions tested, we find that the "best" and "worst" helmets differ by an average of 22.5% in terms of predicted concussions, ranging from 0 to 42% (the latter achieved at the threshold value of 0.28 for peak MPS and 0.4 for CSDM, respectively). Such a large variation among helmets in strain-based concussion predictions demonstrate that helmet designs can still be optimized in a clinically meaningful way. The robustness and accuracy of the CNN tool also suggest its potential for routine use for helmet design and safety performance evaluation in the future. The CNN is freely available online at https://github.com/Jilab-biomechanics/CNN-brain-strains .
Indexed as
Identifiers
35816264What 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.