Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 239

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Magnetic Resonance Versus Computed Tomographic Imaging in Acute Stroke

Mohr, J. P., Biller, J., Hilal, S. K., Yuh, W. T. C., Tatemichi, T. K., Hedges, S., Tali, E., Nguyen, H., Mun, I., Adams, H. P., Grimsman, K., Marler, J. R.·1995·Stroke

Abstract

Background and Purpose This study was an attempt to determine whether CT and MRI are comparable or if one is superior to the other in the early detection of ischemic stroke or hematoma. Methods Patients with acute stroke were sought within 3 hours of onset for clinical examination and prospective evaluation by concurrently performed CT and MRI. Repeated clinical and imaging studies were undertaken when possible immediately after imaging and at 24 hours, 3 to 5 days, and 3 months. The study neurologists were blinded to the results of imaging, as were the study radiologists to the clinical findings. The study radiologists read the scans in sequence, mapping each imaging on standard templates before viewing a later scan. No retrospective revisions of imaging mapping of earlier images were undertaken. Results Sixty-eight patients were recruited within 4 hours and an additional 12 patients within 24 hours. Seventy-five strokes were due to infarction and five to hemorrhage. The median time to first scan was 132 minutes. Although some of the infarctions in 75 patients were detected within 1 hour, the fraction of positive first scans approached an asymptote at 2 to 3 hours. Overall, with the use of conventional non–contrast-enhanced CT and T 1 - and T 2 -weighted MRI, neither was superior in the very early detection of either hematoma or infarction. There was a marginally significant correlation between early positive brain imaging and the severity of the stroke. Some patients had initially positive CT and/or MRI scans, but their neurological examination had returned to normal by 24 hours. Overall, CT was better than baseline MRI at predicting 24-hour outcome. After 24 hours, both CT and MR more conspicuously defined the lesion limits than they did at baseline. Conclusions With the technology available through 1991, neither CT nor MRI proved superior in the detection of the earliest signs of stroke.

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 · 10.1161/01.str.26.5.807

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 239

Metadata

Authors
Mohr, J. P., Biller, J., Hilal, S. K., Yuh, W. T. C., Tatemichi, T. K., Hedges, S., Tali, E., Nguyen, H., Mun, I., Adams, H. P., Grimsman, K., & Marler, J. R.
Venue
Stroke
Published
1995-05
Volume
26
Issue
5
Pages
807-812
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2159685035
Cited by
239
References
0
FWCI
10.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Magnetic Resonance Versus Computed Tomographic Imaging in Acute Stroke. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.str.26.5.807
The paper
Mohr, J. P., Biller, J., Hilal, S. K., Yuh, W. T. C., Tatemichi, T. K., Hedges, S., Tali, E., Nguyen, H., Mun, I., Adams, H. P., Grimsman, K., & Marler, J. R. (1995). Magnetic Resonance Versus Computed Tomographic Imaging in Acute Stroke. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.26.5.807

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.