MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1662727882 · doi:10.1520/stp155220120159

For ASTM F-08: Protective Capacity of Ice Hockey Player Helmets against Puck Impacts

2014· book-chapter· en· W1662727882 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Rousseau, T. Blaine Hoshizaki, Michael D. Gilchrist

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsOntario Neurotrauma Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIce hockeyEnvironmental scienceAeronauticsBusinessForensic engineeringEngineeringPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many studies have assessed the ability of hockey helmets to protect against falls and collisions, yet none have addressed the injury risk associated with puck impacts. Thus, the purpose of this study was to document the capacity of a typical vinyl nitrile ice hockey helmet to reduce head accelerations and brain deformation caused by a puck impact. A bare and a helmeted Hybrid III male 50th percentile headform was struck with a puck three times to the forehead at 17, 23, 29, 35, and 41 m/s using a pneumatic puck launcher. Linear and rotational accelerations were captured using accelerometers fitted in the headform and used as input in the University College Dublin Brain Trauma Model to obtain brain deformation. The helmet reduced peak resultant linear acceleration, peak resultant rotational acceleration, and maximum principal strain, but a comparison with published brain injury risk curves shows that it did not reduce the concussion risk below 50 % for impacts at or above 23 m/s. Thus, a vinyl nitrile ice hockey helmet can protect players from direct puck impacts in amateur and youth leagues but may not be adequate in competitive elite leagues, where the puck can be shot at velocities well above 23 m/s. Furthermore, competitive adult male ice hockey players struck to the helmet by a puck may need to consider changing their helmet, as it was shown that direct impacts at or above 35 m/s decreased the helmet’s ability to reduce head peak linear acceleration in subsequent impacts.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.724
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAutomotive and Human Injury BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207