Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 275

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical usefulness of magnetic resonance imaging in multiple system atrophy

Open access
Schrag, A, Kingsley, D, Phatouros, C, Mathias, C J, Lees, A J, Daniel, S E, Quinn, N P·1998·Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive values of a selection of abnormal findings in the putamen and infratentorial structures on routine magnetic resonance imaging for distinguishing between multiple system atrophy, idiopathic Parkinson's disease, and age matched controls. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two neuroradiologists blindly and independently rated axial T2 weighted and proton density MRI of 44 patients with multiple system atrophy, 47 patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease, and 45 controls. High field (1.5 T) scans were available in 16 patients with multiple system atrophy, 15 patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease, and 16 controls. All other patients had 0.5 T scans. RESULTS: On both 0.5 and 1.5 T scans the following items had high specificity but low sensitivity: putaminal atrophy, a hyperintense putaminal rim, and infratentorial signal change. Finding any infratentorial abnormality gave higher sensitivity but lower specificity. Putaminal isointensity or hypointensity relative to globus pallidus, absolute putaminal hypointensity, and altered size of the olives were not useful discriminators. The overall sensitivity was 73% on 0.5 T and 88% on 1.5 T scans. The specificities of these findings for multiple system atrophy in comparison to idiopathic Parkinson's disease and controls on 0.5 T were 95% and 100% respectively, and on 1.5 T were 93% and 91% respectively. Finding any of the described abnormalities on MRI gave a positive predictive value of 93% on the 0.5 T machine, and 85% on the 1.5 T scanner.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/jnnp.65.1.65

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 275

Metadata

Authors
Schrag, A., Kingsley, D., Phatouros, C., Mathias, C. J., Lees, A. J., Daniel, S. E., & Quinn, N. P.
Venue
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1998-07-01
Volume
65
Issue
1
Pages
65-71
ISSN
0022-3050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2127611196
Cited by
275
References
1
FWCI
5.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinical usefulness of magnetic resonance imaging in multiple system atrophy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jnnp.65.1.65
The paper
Schrag, A., Kingsley, D., Phatouros, C., Mathias, C. J., Lees, A. J., Daniel, S. E., & Quinn, N. P. (1998). Clinical usefulness of magnetic resonance imaging in multiple system atrophy. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.65.1.65

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.