The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Anticonvulsant Use and Outcomes After Intracerebral Hemorrhage
Abstract
Background and Purpose— There are few data on the effectiveness and side effects of antiepileptic drug therapy after intracerebral hemorrhage. We tested the hypothesis that antiepileptic drug use is associated with more complications and worse outcome after intracerebral hemorrhage. Methods— We prospectively enrolled 98 patients with intracerebral hemorrhage and recorded antiepileptic drug use as either prophylactic or therapeutic along with clinical characteristics. Antiepileptic drug administration and free phenytoin serum levels were retrieved from the electronic medical records. Patients with depressed mental status underwent continuous electroencephalographic monitoring. Outcomes were measured with the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and modified Rankin Scale at 14 days or discharge and the modified Rankin Scale at 28 days and 3 months. We constructed logistic regression models for poor outcome at 3 months with a forward conditional model. Results— Seven (7%) patients had a clinical seizure, 5 on the day of intracerebral hemorrhage. Phenytoin was associated with more fever ( P =0.03), worse National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale at 14 days (23 [9 to 42] versus 11 [4 to 23], P =0.003), and worse modified Rankin Scale at 14 days, 28 days, and 3 months. In a forward conditional logistic regression model, phenytoin prophylaxis was associated with an increased risk of poor outcome (OR, 9.8; 1.4 to 68.6; P =0.02), entering after admission National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and age. Excluding patients with a seizure did not change the results. Levetiracetam was not associated with demographics, seizures, complications, or outcomes. Conclusions— Phenytoin was associated with more fever and worse outcomes after intracerebral hemorrhage.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
ASSESSMENT OF COMA AND IMPAIRED CONSCIOUSNESS
Teasdale, G., & Jennett, B. (1974) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(74)91639-0 · Cited by 13,215
Banks, J. L., & Marotta, C. A. (2007) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.0000258355.23810.c6 · Cited by 2,253
Cited by
Winstein, C. J., Stein, J., Arena, R., Bates, B., Cherney, L. R., Cramer, S. C., Deruyter, F., Eng, J. J., Fisher, B., Harvey, R. L., et al. (2016) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/str.0000000000000098 · Cited by 3,293
Metadata
- Authors
- Naidech, A. M., Garg, R. K., Liebling, S., Levasseur, K., Macken, M. P., Schuele, S. U., & Batjer, H. H.
- Venue
- Stroke
- Published
- 2009-12
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 3810-3815
- ISSN
- 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4628
- OpenAlex
- W2103556805
- Cited by
- 195
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 7.69
- 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: Anticonvulsant Use and Outcomes After Intracerebral Hemorrhage. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/strokeaha.109.559948
- The paper
- Naidech, A. M., Garg, R. K., Liebling, S., Levasseur, K., Macken, M. P., Schuele, S. U., & Batjer, H. H. (2009). Anticonvulsant Use and Outcomes After Intracerebral Hemorrhage. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.109.559948
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.