ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2025
Uncalibrated Single-Camera View Video Tracking of Head Impact Speeds Using Model-Based Image Matching.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2025. 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.
- Development of a Fall-Specific Impact Testing Method to Evaluate Safety Helmet Performance and Injury Risk.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Deep learning approaches for head pose estimation in sports impacts.Sports engineering · 2026Article
- Quantitative video analysis of head acceleration events: a review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study evaluates the accuracy of a model-based image matching (MBIM) approach with model calibration for tracking head impact speeds in uncalibrated spaces from single-camera views.
methodsTwo validation datasets were used. The first included 36 videos of guided NOCSAE headform drops at varying camera positions (heights, distances, camera angles) where a speed gate measured vertical impact speed. The second dataset had eight videos of participants performing ladder falls with marked helmets, captured using a 12-camera motion capture system to track head impact speeds. Each video was tracked frame-by-frame, matching a 3D NOCSAE headform model to the head using MBIM software. Accuracy was assessed by comparing captured to MBIM-tracked speeds by the mean difference and Root Mean Square Error (RMSE). A linear model assessed the influence of camera position.
resultsFor ideal camera views (90 degrees, height 1 or 1.4 m), MBIM-tracked vertical speeds were 0.04 ± 0.15 m/s faster than the true speed (RMSE 0.15 m/s; 2.3 ± 6.2% error). Across all 36 NOCSAE videos, MBIM-tracked vertical speeds were 0.03 ± 0.19 m/s faster (RMSE 0.19 m/s; 1.8 ± 6.9 % error). In participant videos, MBIM-tracked resultant speeds were 0.01 ± 0.33 m/s slower (RMES 0.31; 0.7 ± 9.5% error) compared to motion capture.
conclusionMBIM with model calibration can analyze head impact kinematics from single-camera footage without environment calibration, achieving reasonable accuracy compared to other systems. Analyzing head impact kinematics from uncalibrated single-camera footage presents significant opportunities for assessing previously untraceable videos.
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.