ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2016
Renaissance of criticism on the concept of brain death--the role of legal medicine in the context of the interdisciplinary discussion.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Healthcare Professionals' Understandings of the Definition and Determination of Death: A Scoping Review.Transplantation direct · 2022Article
- Religious denomination influencing attitudes towards brain death, organ transplantation and autopsy-a survey among people of different religions.International journal of legal medicine · 2020Article
- Legal Limbo.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the practice of legal medicine in Germany, the assessment of brain death is of minor importance and attracts little attention. However, since several years, international criticism on the concept of brain death has culminated. By reviewing literature and the results of a questionnaire distributed among the participants of the 93rd Annual Congress of the Germany Society of Legal Medicine, the state of knowledge and the current views on brain death were evaluated. MATERIALS AND
methodsLiterature search of recent publications regarding brain death was performed (PubMed database, references of legal medicine, Report of the President's Council on Bioethics, USA 2008). A questionnaire was developed and distributed among the participants of the Congress.
resultsThe assumption that individual and brain death are synonymous is criticized. Internationally, there are trends to harmonize the very different clinical criteria to assess brain death. The diagnostic advantage of novel techniques such as CT angiography is controversially discussed. It becomes apparent that procedures which record the blood flow and perfusion of the brain will be applied more in the future. Regrettably, these developments are not described in the literature of legal medicine. Moreover, among German forensic scientists, different views concerning brain death exist. The majority favors its equivalent treatment with individual death. The thanatological background can be improved concerning certain aspects of brain death as well as its legal implications.
conclusionTeaching and research in legal medicine should include the subject brain death. Expertise in forensic science may contribute to the interdisciplinary discussion on brain death. The transfer of actual knowledge, also on disputed ethical aspects of thanatology, to physicians of all disciplines is of great importance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26174445What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.