ArticlePloS one2025
Machine learning model to study the rugby head impact in a laboratory setting.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The incidence of head impacts in rugby has been a growing concern for player safety. While rugby headgear shows potential to mitigate head impact intensity during laboratory simulations, evaluating its on-field effectiveness is challenging. Current rugby-specific laboratory testing methods may not represent on-field conditions. This study aimed to create a machine-learning model capable of matching head impacts recorded via wearable sensors to the nearest match in a pre-existing library of laboratory-simulated head impacts for further investigation. Separate random forest models were trained, and optimised, on a training dataset of laboratory head impact data to predict the impact location, impact surface angle, neck inclusion, and drop height of a given laboratory head impact. The models achieved hold-out test set accuracies of 0.996, 1.0, 0.998, and 0.96 for the impact location, neck inclusion, impact surface angle, and drop height respectively. When applied to a male and female youth rugby head impact dataset, most impacts were classified as being to the side or rear of the head, with very few at the front of the head. Nearly 80% were more similar to laboratory impacts that included the neck with an impact surface angled at 30 or 45° with just under 20% being aligned with impacts onto a flat impact surface, and most were classified as low drop height impacts (7.5-30cm). Further analysis of the time series kinematics and spatial brain strain resulting from impact is required to align the laboratory head impact testing with the on-field conditions.
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.