Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 569

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A new grading system evaluating bleeding scale in filament perforation subarachnoid hemorrhage rat model

Sugawara, Takashi, Ayer, Robert, Jadhav, Vikram, Zhang, John H.·2008·Journal of Neuroscience Methods

Abstract

The endovascular perforation rodent model for experimental subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) studies is criticized for lack of control over bleeding. Presently, there is no practical grading system to categorize the severity of SAH depending on the amount of blood. We outline a simple and objective novel SAH grading system by examining the subarachnoid blood clots in the basal cisterns, and evaluate for correlation with neurological status and cerebral vasospasm. Effects of simvastatin, known to reduce vasospasm, were examined using this grading system. Seventy-seven adult male Sprague-Dawley rats were divided randomly into three groups: sham-operated (n=24), SAH (n=32), and SAH+simvastatin (n=25). High-resolution brain pictures were used to grade the severity of SAH and categorize animals into mild, moderate and severe groups. The SAH grades were compared with neurological scores and internal carotid artery parameters such as diameter, perimeter and wall thickness at 24h. Two investigators verified the grading system independently. The SAH grade showed linear correlation functionally with neurological status (r=0.42, p 0.7, p<0.01), and also between two independent investigators (r=0.937, p<0.001). Simvastatin improved neurological score in moderate and severe (p<0.05) but not mild SAH groups (p=0.28). This grading system has the potential to be adopted for SAH experimental rodent models.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.08.004

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 569

Metadata

Authors
Sugawara, T., Ayer, R., Jadhav, V., & Zhang, J. H.
Venue
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-01
Volume
167
Issue
2
Pages
327-334
ISSN
0165-0270
Cited by
569
References
18
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.