Sensitivity of brain injury criteria to anthropometric scaling assumptions in instrumented mouthguard data

Instrumented mouthguards (iMGs) enable in-game measurement of head acceleration events (HAEs) in contact sports, forming the basis for brain injury criteria (BICs). However, most commercial systems assume a 50th-percentile male head model for center-of-mass (COMh) transformations, which may bias risk estimates for athletes of different sex and body size. To quantify how anthropometric scaling assumptions influence BICs derived from iMG data, we analyzed 15,237 video-verified HAEs from 572 community rugby players (ages 10–38 years; 34–142 kg). Three scaling approaches were compared: (i) a one-size-fits-all baseline reference (Hybrid III 50th-percentile male), (ii) a sex- and weight-adjusted regression-based model, and (iii) a multiple-fixed-reference model incorporating three discrete headform sizes based on sex and body mass. Outcome metrics included peak linear acceleration, head impact criterion (HIC & PRHIC), head impact power (HIP lin/rot ) and kinetic energy (KE lin/rot ) computed using rigid-body transformations and optimized algorithms. Generalized additive models evaluated scaling effects across weight strata. Scaling assumptions significantly altered BIC magnitudes, particularly at size extremes. Female players modeled with male parameters exhibited up to 54% higher PRHIC and 18–27% higher HIP and kinetic energy values ( p < 0.001). For lighter players (<55 kg), the multiple-fixed-reference model reduced predicted rotational power by more than 60% relative to the baseline reference. Misclassification near operational thresholds (e.g., PLA ≥ 65 g) occurred in both sexes, with bias direction dependent on head-size assumptions. Anthropometric scaling exerts a substantial influence on iMG-derived BICs and threshold-based classifications of head-impact severity. Incorporating sex- and size-appropriate scaling, or pragmatic multiple-fixed-reference models, can reduce systematic bias and improve interpretability, and equity of head-impact surveillance in contact sports.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Biomechanics
Published
2026-05-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2026.113378
Primary Topic
Dental Trauma and Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Sensitivity of brain injury criteria to anthropometric scaling assumptions in instrumented mouthguard data

Melanie D. Bussey, Joshua P. McGeown, Sergio Dempsey
Journal of Biomechanics
Dental Trauma and Treatments
article

Sensitivity of brain injury criteria to anthropometric scaling assumptions in instrumented mouthguard data

Melanie D. Bussey, Joshua P. McGeown, Sergio Dempsey
article en

Abstract

Instrumented mouthguards (iMGs) enable in-game measurement of head acceleration events (HAEs) in contact sports, forming the basis for brain injury criteria (BICs). However, most commercial systems assume a 50th-percentile male head model for center-of-mass (COMh) transformations, which may bias risk estimates for athletes of different sex and body size. To quantify how anthropometric scaling assumptions influence BICs derived from iMG data, we analyzed 15,237 video-verified HAEs from 572 community rugby players (ages 10–38 years; 34–142 kg). Three scaling approaches were compared: (i) a one-size-fits-all baseline reference (Hybrid III 50th-percentile male), (ii) a sex- and weight-adjusted regression-based model, and (iii) a multiple-fixed-reference model incorporating three discrete headform sizes based on sex and body mass. Outcome metrics included peak linear acceleration, head impact criterion (HIC & PRHIC), head impact power (HIP lin/rot ) and kinetic energy (KE lin/rot ) computed using rigid-body transformations and optimized algorithms. Generalized additive models evaluated scaling effects across weight strata. Scaling assumptions significantly altered BIC magnitudes, particularly at size extremes. Female players modeled with male parameters exhibited up to 54% higher PRHIC and 18–27% higher HIP and kinetic energy values ( p < 0.001). For lighter players (<55 kg), the multiple-fixed-reference model reduced predicted rotational power by more than 60% relative to the baseline reference. Misclassification near operational thresholds (e.g., PLA ≥ 65 g) occurred in both sexes, with bias direction dependent on head-size assumptions. Anthropometric scaling exerts a substantial influence on iMG-derived BICs and threshold-based classifications of head-impact severity. Incorporating sex- and size-appropriate scaling, or pragmatic multiple-fixed-reference models, can reduce systematic bias and improve interpretability, and equity of head-impact surveillance in contact sports.

Journal of BiomechanicsVol. 204
University of Auckland (NZ), Auckland University of Technology (NZ), General Electric (New Zealand) (NZ), Medical Research Institute of New Zealand (NZ), Fisher & Paykel Healthcare (New Zealand) (NZ), Brain Research New Zealand (NZ), Mātai Medical Research Institute, University of Otago (NZ)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Dental Trauma and Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.