ReviewExperiments in fluids2024
Cavitation in blunt impact traumatic brain injury.
Review in Experiments in fluids, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nuclear mechanotransduction: tools for mechanical perturbation and chromatin characterization.Nucleus (Austin, Tex.) · 2026Review
- Mechanisms of inflammatory response in secondary brain injury: a review of computational approaches, challenges, and future directions.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2026Review
- Acoustic Detection of Intracranial Cavitation Induced by Blunt Impacts in Polyacrylamide Human Head Models Across Varying Orientations.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) poses a major public health challenge. No proven therapies for the condition exist so protective equipment that prevents or mitigates these injuries plays a critical role in minimizing the societal burden of this condition. Our ability to optimize protective equipment depends on our capacity to relate the mechanics of head impact events to morbidity and mortality. This capacity, in turn, depends on correctly identifying the mechanisms of injury. For several decades, a controversial theory of TBI biomechanics has attributed important classes of injury to cavitation inside the cranial vault during blunt impact. This theory explains counter-intuitive clinical observations, including the coup-contre-coup pattern of injury. However, it is also difficult to validate experimentally in living subjects. Also, blunt impact TBI is a broad term that covers a range of different head impact events, some of which may be better described by cavitation theory than others. This review surveys what has been learned about cavitation through mathematical modeling, physical modeling, and experimentation with living tissues and places it in context with competing theories of blunt injury biomechanics and recent research activity in the field in an attempt to understand what the theory has to offer the next generation of innovators in TBI biomechanics.
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.