Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39028399›Full record

ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2024

Accuracy of Instrumented Mouthguards During Direct Jaw Impacts Seen in Boxing.

Jay Venkatraman, Mitchell Z Abrams, Donald Sherman, Maria Ortiz-Paparoni, Jefferson R Bercaw, Robert E MacDonald, Jason Kait, Elizabeth Dimbath, Derek Pang, Alexandra Gray and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Jay VenkatramanDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA. jay.venkatraman@wayne.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7246-2904
Mitchell Z AbramsDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Donald ShermanDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA.
Maria Ortiz-PaparoniDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Jefferson R BercawDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Robert E MacDonaldDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA.
Jason KaitDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Elizabeth DimbathDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Derek PangDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Alexandra GrayDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Jason F LuckDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Cameron R BassDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA.
Cynthia A BirDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMeasuring head kinematics data is important to understand and develop methods and standards to mitigate head injuries in contact sports. Instrumented mouthguards (iMGs) have been developed to address coupling issues with previous sensors. Although validated with anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs), there is limited post-mortem human subjects (PMHS) data which provides more accurate soft tissue responses. This study evaluated two iMGs (Prevent Biometrics (PRE) and Diversified Technical Systems (DTS) in response to direct jaw impacts.

methodsThree unembalmed male cadaver heads were properly fitted with two different boil-and-bite iMGs and impacted with hook (4 m/s) and uppercut (3 m/s) punches. A reference sensor (REF) was rigidly attached to the base of the skull, impact kinematics were transformed to the head center of gravity and linear and angular kinematic data were compared to the iMGs including Peak Linear Acceleration, Peak Angular Acceleration, Peak Angular Velocity, Head Injury Criterion (HIC), HIC duration, and Brain Injury Criterion.

resultsCompared to the REF sensor, the PRE iMG underpredicted most of the kinematic data with slopes of the validation regression line between 0.72 and 1.04 and the DTS overpredicted all the kinematic data with slopes of the regression line between 1.4 and 8.7.

conclusionWhile the PRE iMG was closer to the REF sensor compared to the DTS iMG, the results did not support the previous findings reported with use of ATDs. Hence, our study highlights the benefits of using PMHS for validating the accuracy of iMGs since they closely mimic the human body compared to any ATD's mandible.

Indexed as

Craniocerebral TraumaMouth ProtectorsAccelerationAthletic InjuriesBiomechanical PhenomenaCadaverHeadHumansJawMaleBoxing punchesInstrumented mouthguardsPost-mortem human subjects

Identifiers

PMID39028399

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.