Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 605

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

Incidence and outcome of cervical artery dissection: A population-based study

Lee, Vivien H., Brown, Robert D., Mandrekar, Jayawant N., Mokri, Bahram·2006·Neurology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Incidence rates for internal carotid artery dissection (ICAD) have been reported to be 2.6 to 2.9 per 100,000, but reliable epidemiologic data for vertebral artery dissection (VAD) are not available. OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence rate of cervical artery dissection (CAD) in a defined population. METHODS: With IRB approval, we used the medical record linkage system of the Rochester Epidemiology Project to identify all patients diagnosed with spontaneous ICAD and VAD for the period of 1987-2003 in Olmsted County, MN. RESULTS: Of 48 patients with CAD, there were 32 patients with ICAD and 18 patients with VAD. In Olmsted County, the average annual incidence rate for ICAD was 1.72 per 100,000 population (95% CI, 1.13 to 2.32) and for VAD 0.97 per 100,000 population (95% CI, 0.52 to 1.4). The average annual incidence rate for CAD was 2.6 per 100,000 population (95% CI, 1.86 to 3.33). The most frequently encountered symptoms in CAD were head or neck pain (80%), cerebral ischemia (TIA or infarct) (56%), and Horner syndrome (25%). Good outcome (defined as modified Rankin score of 0 to 2) was seen in 92% of patients. No recurrence of dissection was observed during a mean 7.8 years of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Internal carotid artery dissection was detected approximately twice as frequently as vertebral artery dissection in the overall study, but in the latter half of the study period, vertebral artery and internal carotid artery dissection incidence rates were equivalent. The majority of cervical artery dissection patients in the community have excellent outcome, and contrary to many tertiary referral series, re-dissection is rare.

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 · 10.1212/01.wnl.0000244486.30455.71

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 605

Metadata

Authors
Lee, V. H., Brown, R. D., Mandrekar, J. N., & Mokri, B.
Venue
Neurology
Published
2006-11-28
Volume
67
Issue
10
Pages
1809-1812
ISSN
  • 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-632X
OpenAlex
W2043328909
Cited by
605
References
1
FWCI
13.15
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: Incidence and outcome of cervical artery dissection: A population-based study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1212/01.wnl.0000244486.30455.71
The paper
Lee, V. H., Brown, R. D., Mandrekar, J. N., & Mokri, B. (2006). Incidence and outcome of cervical artery dissection: A population-based study. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000244486.30455.71

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.