ArticleThe Journal of medicine and philosophy2016
Are Brain Dead Individuals Dead? Grounds for Reasonable Doubt.
Article in The Journal of medicine and philosophy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inconsistency between the Circulatory and the Brain Criteria of Death in the Uniform Determination of Death Act.The Journal of medicine and philosophy · 2023Article
- Death pluralism: a proposal.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2023Article
- Brain death debates: from bioethics to philosophy of science.F1000Research · 2022Article
- Brain Death and the Dutch Organ Donation Law.The Linacre quarterly · 2020Article
- Brain Death and the Formation of Moral Conscience.The Linacre quarterly · 2019Article
- Humility before New Scientific Evidence: We No Longer Have Moral Certainty that "Brain Death" Is True Death.The Linacre quarterly · 2019Article
- Evolution of the Criteria of "Brain Death": A Critical Analysis Based on Scientific Realism and Christian Anthropology.The Linacre quarterly · 2019Article
- When are you dead enough to be a donor? Can any feasible protocol for the determination of death on circulatory criteria respect the dead donor rule?Theoretical medicine and bioethics · 2019Article
- Symposium on the Definition of Death: Summary Statement.The Journal of medicine and philosophy · 2016Article
- Brain Death and Human Organismal Integration: A Symposium on the Definition of Death.The Journal of medicine and philosophy · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
According to the biological definition of death, a human body that has not lost the capacity to holistically organize itself is the body of a living human individual. Reasonable doubt against the conclusion that it has lost the capacity exists when the body appears to express it and no evidence to the contrary is sufficient to rule out reasonable doubt against the conclusion that the apparent expression is a true expression (i.e., when the conclusion that what appears to be holistic organization is in fact holistic organization remains a reasonable explanatory hypothesis in light of the best evidence to the contrary). This essay argues that the evidence and arguments against the conclusion that the signs of complex bodily integration exhibited in ventilated brain dead bodies are true expressions of somatic integration are unpersuasive; that is, they are not adequate to exclude reasonable doubt against the conclusion that BD bodies are dead. Since we should not treat as corpses what for all we know might be living human beings, it follows that we have an obligation to treat BD individuals as if they were living human beings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.