2021
DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2021.0260
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The relationship between brain injury criteria and brain strain across different types of head impacts can be different

Abstract: Multiple brain injury criteria (BIC) are developed to quickly quantify brain injury risks after head impacts. These BIC originated from different head impact types (e.g. sports and car crashes) are widely used in risk evaluation. However, the accuracy of using the BIC on brain injury risk estimation across head impact types has not been evaluated. Physiologically, brain strain is often considered the key parameter of brain injury. To evaluate the BIC's risk estimation accuracy across five datasets comprising d… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To date, the best predictors of human brain injury are the peak regional brain strain (specifically the maximal principal strain -MPS) and axonal strain 29,[31][32][33] , followed by the peak rotational velocity and acceleration (PRV and PRA) 28,34 . Recent developments in finite element (FE) modelling and machine learning have made it possible to generate both peak strain values 35,36 and 3D maps of voxel-wise brain strain 37,38 resulting from an impact instantly instead of the several hours, and prohibitively large computational power, conventional FE simulations require.…”
Section: /15mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To date, the best predictors of human brain injury are the peak regional brain strain (specifically the maximal principal strain -MPS) and axonal strain 29,[31][32][33] , followed by the peak rotational velocity and acceleration (PRV and PRA) 28,34 . Recent developments in finite element (FE) modelling and machine learning have made it possible to generate both peak strain values 35,36 and 3D maps of voxel-wise brain strain 37,38 resulting from an impact instantly instead of the several hours, and prohibitively large computational power, conventional FE simulations require.…”
Section: /15mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Head impact severity can be objectively described using linear and angular head kinematics to derive kinematic-based injury criteria or can serve as an input to finite element models that estimate the strain-based response of the brain tissue as a result of the impact event [ 12 – 14 ]. However, until recent advances in instrumented mouthguards (iMG), there have been limitations in the accuracy of on-field monitoring of head kinematics [ 15 – 17 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The application of CM based injury criteria involves the numerical simulation of head motion of a traumatic event of interest followed by a comparison of the predicted strain ( ) and strain rate ( 9 ) from the model with critical values for injury. Some measures of strain that are widely used in CM based injury criteria are the peak maximum principal strain (MPS), maximum axonal strain (MAS) or tract-oriented strain, and the cumulative strain damage measure (CSDM) [9,10,11,12,13,14]. Determining the measures of strain and strain rate that are most pertinent for mTBI and determining their critical values, i.e., the values at which the risk of injury becomes significant, is an active area of research [8,15,7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%