The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Do Clinicians Overestimate the Severity of Intracerebral Hemorrhage?
Open accessAbstract
Background and Purpose—: Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) has a poorer prognosis than acute ischemic stroke (AIS). However, clinician perception of prognosis may influence treatment decisions and adversely affect outcome. On acute CT, the conspicuity of ICH compared with AIS may lead clinicians to overestimate severity and influence prognostic evaluation. We investigated whether clinicians’ estimates of volume, severity, and prognosis from acute imaging differed between ICH and AIS. Methods—: CT scans from participants with acute ICH or ischemic stroke were reviewed. Volume was calculated using the ABC/2 method and automated volumetric analysis via specialized imaging software. ICH cases were matched with AIS cases for lesion volume, based on acute (<6 hours) CT for ICH, and 24-hour CT for AIS. Blind to clinical information, clinicians estimated lesion volume to the nearest 5 mL, graded lesion severity from 1 (mild) to 5 (very severe), and estimated 30-day prognosis using the modified Rankin Scale. Results—: We compared 33 ICH cases with 33 volume-matched AIS cases. Clinicians overestimated ICH volume and underestimated AIS volumes: mean differences (estimated−actual volume) were +8 mL (±30) for ICH and −8 mL (±27) for AIS ( P <0.001). Observers rated ICH to be of greater severity and poorer prognosis compared with AIS cases: 109 of 265 (41%) ICH cases rated severity categories 4 or 5 compared with 36 of 257 (14%) AIS, P <0.001; estimated modified Rankin Scale of 0 to 2 in 125 of 265 (47%) ICH compared with 190 of 257 (74%) AIS, P <0.001. Results were unaffected by presence of intraventricular blood. Estimated severity and prognosis for ICH remained significantly worse compared with AIS after adjustment for estimated volumes. Conclusions—: Clinicians overestimated ICH volume and severity compared with AIS of equivalent volume and also assigned significantly worse prognosis independent of volume estimates.
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
Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients
van Swieten, J. C., Koudstaal, P. J., Visser, M. C., Schouten, H. J., & van Gijn, J. (1988) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.19.5.604 · Cited by 6,512
Wardlaw, J. M., Smith, E. E., Biessels, G. J., Cordonnier, C., Fazekas, F., Frayne, R., Lindley, R. I., O'Brien, J. T., Barkhof, F., Benavente, O. R., et al. (2013) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(13)70124-8 · Cited by 5,544
Adams, H. P., Davis, P. H., Leira, E. C., Chang, K.-C., Bendixen, B. H., Clarke, W. R., Woolson, R. F., & Hansen, M. D. (1999) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.53.1.126 · Cited by 1,456
Cited by
Feigin, V. L., Owolabi, M. O., Feigin, V. L., Abd-Allah, F., Akinyemi, R. O., Bhattacharjee, N. V., Brainin, M., Cao, J., Caso, V., Dalton, B., et al. (2023) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(23)00277-6 · Cited by 804
Fischer, U., Kaesmacher, J., Strbian, D., Eker, O., Cognard, C., Plattner, P. S., Bütikofer, L., Mordasini, P., Deppeler, S., Pereira, V. M., et al. (2022) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(22)00537-2 · Cited by 291
Mitchell, P. J., Yan, B., Churilov, L., Dowling, R. J., Bush, S. J., Bivard, A., Huo, X. C., Wang, G., Zhang, S. Y., Ton, M. D., et al. (2022) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(22)00564-5 · Cited by 229
Metadata
- Authors
- Tilling, E. J., El Tawil, S., & Muir, K. W.
- Venue
- Stroke
- Published
- 2019-02
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 344-348
- ISSN
- 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4628
- OpenAlex
- W2911196419
- Cited by
- 1,120
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 74.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Do Clinicians Overestimate the Severity of Intracerebral Hemorrhage? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/strokeaha.118.022606
- The paper
- Tilling, E. J., El Tawil, S., & Muir, K. W. (2019). Do Clinicians Overestimate the Severity of Intracerebral Hemorrhage? Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.118.022606
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.