Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 313

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Density and Shape as CT Predictors of Intracerebral Hemorrhage Growth

Barras, Christen D., Tress, Brian M., Christensen, Soren, MacGregor, Lachlan, Collins, Marnie, Desmond, Patricia M., Skolnick, Brett E., Mayer, Stephan A., Broderick, Joseph P., Diringer, Michael N., Steiner, Thorsten, Davis, Stephen M.·2009·Stroke

Abstract

Background and Purpose— Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) growth predicts mortality and functional outcome. We hypothesized that irregular hematoma shape and density heterogeneity, reflecting active, multifocal bleeding or a variable bleeding time course, would predict ICH growth. Methods— Three raters examined baseline sub-3-hour CT brain scans of 90 patients in the placebo arm of a Phase IIb trial of recombinant activated Factor VII in ICH. Each rater, blinded to growth data, independently applied novel 5-point categorical scales of density and shape to randomly presented baseline CT images of ICH. Density and shape were defined as either homogeneous/regular (Category 1 to 2) or heterogeneous/irregular (Category 3 to 5). Within- and between-rater reliability was determined for these scales. Growth was assessed as a continuous variable and using 3 binary definitions: (1) any ICH growth; (2) ≥33% or ≥12.5 mL ICH growth; and (3) radial growth >1 mm between baseline and 24-hour CT scan. Patients were divided into tertiles of baseline ICH volume: “small” (0 to 10 mL), “medium” (10 to 25 mL), and “large” (25 to 106 mL). Results— Inter- and intrarater agreements for the novel scales exceeded 85% (±1 category). Median growth was significantly higher in the large-volume group compared with the small group ( P <0.001) and in heterogeneous compared with homogeneous ICH ( P =0.008). Median growth trended higher in irregular ICHs compared with regular ICHs ( P =0.084). Small ICHs were more regularly shaped (43%) than medium (17%) and large (3%) ICHs ( P <0.001). Small ICHs were more homogeneous (73%) compared with medium (37%) and large (17%) ICHs ( P <0.001). Adjusting for baseline ICH volume and time to scan, density heterogeneity, but not shape irregularity, independently predicted ICH growth ( P =0.046) on a continuous growth scale. Conclusions— Large ICHs were significantly more irregular in shape, heterogeneous in density, and had greater growth. Density heterogeneity independently predicted ICH growth using some definitions.

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/strokeaha.108.536888

Cites

40 of 40 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 40 references

Metadata

Authors
Barras, C. D., Tress, B. M., Christensen, S., MacGregor, L., Collins, M., Desmond, P. M., Skolnick, B. E., Mayer, S. A., Broderick, J. P., Diringer, M. N., Steiner, T., & Davis, S. M.
Venue
Stroke
Published
2009-04
Volume
40
Issue
4
Pages
1325-1331
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2070999990
Cited by
313
References
40
FWCI
3.38
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: Density and Shape as CT Predictors of Intracerebral Hemorrhage Growth. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/strokeaha.108.536888
The paper
Barras, C. D., Tress, B. M., Christensen, S., MacGregor, L., Collins, M., Desmond, P. M., Skolnick, B. E., Mayer, S. A., Broderick, J. P., Diringer, M. N., Steiner, T., & Davis, S. M. (2009). Density and Shape as CT Predictors of Intracerebral Hemorrhage Growth. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.108.536888

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.