ReviewAnnals of biomedical engineering2022
Best Practices for Conducting Physical Reconstructions of Head Impacts in Sport.
Review 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, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Unlocking the Impact: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Biomechanical Insights into Rugby Head Impacts Using Wearable Sensor Technology.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Pooled it
- Deep learning approaches for head pose estimation in sports impacts.Sports engineering · 2026Article
- Article
- Does Reduced Ball Inflation Pressure in Association Football Decrease Head Impact Kinematics?Annals of biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Quantitative video analysis of head acceleration events: a review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Measuring Head Acceleration Like a CHAMP.Journal of athletic training · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Physical reconstructions are a valuable methodology for quantifying head kinematics in sports impacts. By recreating the motion of human heads observed in video using instrumented test dummies in a laboratory, physical reconstructions allow for in-depth study of real-world head impacts using well-established surrogates such as the Hybrid III crash test dummy. The purpose of this paper is to review all aspects of the physical reconstruction methodology and discuss the advantages and limitations associated with different choices in case selection, study design, test surrogate, test apparatus, text matrix, instrumentation, and data processing. Physical reconstructions require significant resources to perform and are therefore typically limited to small sample sizes and a case series or case-control study design. Their accuracy may also be limited by a lack of dummy biofidelity. The accuracy, repeatability, and sensitivity of the reconstruction process can be characterized and improved by good laboratory practices and iterative testing. Because wearable sensors have their own limitations and are not available or practical for many sports, physical reconstructions will continue to provide a useful and complementary approach to measuring head acceleration in sport for the foreseeable future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35876938What 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.