The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Incidence of status epilepticus in Rochester, Minnesota, 1965-1984
Abstract
Immunoaffinity columns are prepared from the monoclonal antibody (MAb) GAD-1. These columns are used to enrich glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) from the cytosolic fraction of rat brain homogenates and from Triton X-100 extracts of the brain membrane fraction. In each case enzyme activity is enriched over 400-fold. The immunopurified fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE. Fractions purified from the cytosol consisted of a quantitatively major band of 59 kDa, and one band of 63 kDa, as well as a group centered around 55 kDa. Fractions purified from membranes consisted primarily of the 59 and 63 kDa components; only traces of the lower-molecular-weight components were present. The entire set of proteins purified on GAD-1 immunoaffinity columns is strongly recognized by 2 widely used antisera to GAD, those described in Saito et al. (1974) and Oertel et al. (1981). The 59 kDa protein from the cytosolic fraction was purified to homogeneity by preparative SDS-PAGE; a partial amino acid sequence of this protein was obtained. The 59 kDa protein has a high degree of sequence homology with the deduced amino acid sequence of the protein that was coded for by a cDNA for feline GAD (Kaufman et al., 1986; Kobayashi et al., 1987). Thus, these proteins are either products of a single gene that diverged during the evolution of rat and cat from a common ancestor, or are members of a closely related set of genes found in both species. The MAb GAD-6 recognizes the 59 kDa band and the group of bands centered around 55 kDa on Western blots. Therefore, these proteins are immunochemically related. GAD-6 does not recognize the 63 kDa band. In Western blots of unfractionated homogenates of the whole brain, the only band recognized by GAD-6 is a 59 kDa band.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
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
Huntington disease: Clinical care and evaluation
Shoulson, I., & Fahn, S. (1979) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.29.1.1 · Cited by 746
Cited by
Chin, R. F., Neville, B. G., Peckham, C., Bedford, H., Wade, A., & Scott, R. C. (2006) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(06)69043-0 · Cited by 594
Non-convulsive status epilepticus in adults: clinical forms and treatment
Meierkord, H., & Holtkamp, M. (2007) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(07)70074-1 · Cited by 265
Incidence and Short‐term Prognosis of Status Epilepticus in Adults in Bologna, Italy
Vignatelli, L., Tonon, C., D'Alessandro, R., & Bologna Group for the Study of Status Epilepticus (2003) · Epilepsia · doi:10.1046/j.1528-1157.2003.63702.x · Cited by 253
Sex and Gender Differences in Central Nervous System-Related Disorders
Zagni, E., Simoni, L., & Colombo, D. (2016) · Neuroscience Journal · doi:10.1155/2016/2827090 · Cited by 173
Christian, C. A., Reddy, D. S., Maguire, J., & Forcelli, P. A. (2020) · Pharmacological Reviews · doi:10.1124/pr.119.017392 · Cited by 105
Metadata
- Authors
- Hesdorffer, D. C., Logroscino, G., Cascino, G., Annegers, J. F., & Hauser, W. A.
- Venue
- Neurology
- Published
- 1998-03
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 735-741
- ISSN
- 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-632X
- OpenAlex
- W2170047676
- Cited by
- 494
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.45
- 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 of status epilepticus in Rochester, Minnesota, 1965-1984. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1212/wnl.50.3.735
- The paper
- Hesdorffer, D. C., Logroscino, G., Cascino, G., Annegers, J. F., & Hauser, W. A. (1998). Incidence of status epilepticus in Rochester, Minnesota, 1965-1984. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.50.3.735
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.