Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,326

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A new classification of head injury based on computerized tomography

Marshall, Lawrence F., Marshall, Sharon Bowers, Klauber, Melville R., Clark, Marjan van Berkum, Eisenberg, Howard M., Jane, John A., Luerssen, Thomas G., Marmarou, Anthony, Foulkes, Mary A.·1991·Journal of Neurosurgery

Abstract

✓ A new classification of head injury based primarily on information gleaned from the initial computerized tomography (CT) scan is described. It utilizes the status of the mesencephalic cisterns, the degree of midline shift in millimeters, and the presence or absence of one or more surgical masses. The term “diffuse head injury” is divided into four subgroups, defined as follows: Diffuse Injury I includes all diffuse head injuries where there is no visible pathology; Diffuse Injury II includes all diffuse injuries in which the cisterns are present, the midline shift is less than 5 mm, and/or there is no high- or mixed-density lesion of more than 25 cc; Diffuse Injury III includes diffuse injuries with swelling where the cisterns are compressed or absent and the midline shift is 0 to 5 mm with no high- or mixed-density lesion of more than 25 cc; and Diffuse Injury IV includes diffuse injuries with a midline shift of more than 5 mm and with no high- or mixed-density lesion of more than 25 cc. There is a direct relationship between these four diagnostic categories and the mortality rate. Patients suffering diffuse injury with no visible pathology (Diffuse Injury I) have the lowest mortality rate (10%), while the mortality rate in patients suffering diffuse injury with a midline shift (Diffuse Injury IV) is greater than 50%. When used in conjunction with the traditional division of intracranial hemorrhages (extradural, subdural, or intracerebral), this categorization allows a much better assessment of the risk of intracranial hypertension and of a fatal or nonfatal outcome. This more accurate categorization of diffuse head injury, based primarily on the result of the initial CT scan, permits specific subsets of patients to be targeted for specific types of therapy. Patients who would appear to be at low risk based on a clinical examination, but who are known from the CT scan diagnosis to be at high risk, can now be identified.

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 · 10.3171/sup.1991.75.1s.0s14

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Marshall, L. F., Marshall, S. B., Klauber, M. R., Clark, M. V. B., Eisenberg, H. M., Jane, J. A., Luerssen, T. G., Marmarou, A., & Foulkes, M. A.
Venue
Journal of Neurosurgery
Published
1991-11
Volume
75
Issue
Supplement
Pages
S14-S20
ISSN
0022-3085 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1948023428
Cited by
1,326
References
2
FWCI
9.72
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

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.