Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31073459›Full record

ReviewJournal of pediatric intensive care2017

Disputes in the Declaration of Brain Death: A Case Illustration.

Eleanor Peterson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of pediatric intensive care, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Themes in the Management of Pediatric Brain Death Contestation: Exploratory Qualitative Work From Multidisciplinary Health Professionals in the United States.Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Eleanor PetersonDivision of Pediatric Critical Care, Department of Pediatrics, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Death by neurologic criteria is a legal definition upheld in all 50 states in the United States. Confusion among the public may cause the declaration of death to be disputed and the removal of physiologic support delayed. In this report, a case is described of an infant who died from traumatic brain injury, but whose removal from respiratory and cardiovascular support was delayed due to a legal injunction brought forth from his family against the hospital. In addition, ethical issues faced by the health care team are discussed surrounding continuing medical therapies for a patient after the declaration of death.

Indexed as

brain deathethicslegal

Identifiers

PMID31073459
PMCPMC6260317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.