ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2024
How Shell Add-On Products Influence Varsity Football Helmet Performance?
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeThe study purpose was to investigate the laboratory-based performance of three commercially available shell add-on products under varsity-level impact conditions.
methodsPendulum impact tests were conducted at multiple locations (front, front boss, rear, side) and speeds (3.1, 4.9, 6.4 m/s) using two helmet models. Tests were performed with a single add-on configuration for baseline comparisons and a double add-on configuration to simulate collisions with both players wearing shell add-ons. A linear mixed-effect model was used to evaluate peak linear acceleration (PLA), peak rotational acceleration (PRA), and concussion risk, which was calculated from a bivariate injury risk function, based on shell add-on and test configuration.
resultsAll shell add-ons decreased peak head kinematics and injury risk compared to controls, with the Guardian NXT producing the largest reductions (PLA: 7.9%, PRA: 14.1%, Risk: 34.1%) compared to the SAFR Helmet Cover (PLA: 4.5%, PRA: 9.3%, Risk: 24.7%) and Guardian XT (PLA: 3.2%, PRA: 5.0%, Risk: 15.5%). The same trend was observed in the double add-on test configuration. However, the Guardian NXT (PLA: 17.1%; PRA: 11.5%; Risk: 62.8%) and SAFR Helmet Cover (PLA: 12.2%; PRA: 9.1%; Risk: 52.2%) produced larger reductions in peak head kinematics and injury risk than the Guardian XT (PLA: 5.7%, PRA: 2.2%, Risk: 21.8%).
conclusionIn laboratory-based assessments that simulated varsity-level impact conditions, the Guardian NXT was associated with larger reductions in PLA, PRA, and injury risk compared to the SAFR Helmet Cover and Guardian XT. Although shell add-ons can enhance head protection, helmet model selection should be prioritized.
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.