ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2026
Noninvasive mapping of shear strain predicts the anatomical distribution of mild traumatic brain injury.
Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Shear strain has been implicated as a key factor driving tissue injury in traumatic brain injury (TBI) (Holbourn, 1943; Ommaya et al., 1994; Margulies et al., 1990), but evidence has been lacking that links in vivo measures of strain in the human brain to the distribution of structural damage observed in TBI. In this study, we investigated the relation between strain concentration, measured using Magnetic Resonance Elastography (MRE), and changes in structural integrity, measured using Apparent Fiber Density (AFD), in mild TBI (mTBI) patients. We use MRE to show that regions commonly associated with differential brain tissue damage - such as the midbrain, cerebellum, mesial temporal lobe, and the interface between the cortex and white matter at sulcal depths as well as the corpus callosum (McKee and Daneshvar, 2015; Weiner et al., 2014; Weiner et al., 2017; Tomaiuolo et al., 2004; Maxwell et al., 2006; Hirad et al., 2019; Blecher et al., 2019; Bartsch and Deuschl, 2010; Smith et al., 1997; Ross et al., 1993; Zimmerman et al., 2023; Ghajari et al., 2017) - are also sites of biomechanical vulnerability due to shear strain concentration in healthy participants. We then found that the regions that exhibit high strain, measured with MRE in healthy participants, are the sites of greatest injury, as measured with diffusion MR in acute, sub-acute, and chronic mTBI patients. These findings provide in vivo evidence in humans that brain structures differentially vulnerable to high biomechanical strain from skull force loading also exhibit disrupted tissue integrity across the acute, sub-acute, and chronic phases of mTBI recovery. Follow on analyses demonstrate that strain concentration in those regions results from both the differential focusing of impact energy as well as inadequate energy dissipation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.