Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32431420›Full record

ArticleThe Linacre quarterly2019

When Death Is Not the End: Continuing Somatic Care during Postmortem Pregnancy.

Jennifer J Barr

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Linacre quarterly, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Attitudes of Polish Doctors towards Brain Death.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  3. Review
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.

Jennifer J BarrCollege of Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7263-9650

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Brain death during the second trimester of pregnancy creates a unique situation in which the mother is deceased, but life of the developing fetus still depends on somatic functions in the mother's body. In this article, I show that when a pregnant woman becomes brain dead during the second trimester, it is morally licit, though not morally obligatory, to continue somatic support while the fetus develops. The interventions on the mother's body are justified for the life of the fetus, especially in light of the unique mother-child dyad and the responsibilities the mother has for her child. However, this therapy is not frequently employed, and its success is unpredictable. In many cases, the expense and uncertain nature of the therapy may make it disproportionate. In such cases, somatic support of the mother's body may be discontinued. SUMMARY: When brain death is diagnosed during pregnancy, it is a challenging decision whether to use artificial ventilation and other heroic measures to support the developing fetus. This paper demonstrates that while these interventions are acceptable, they are not obligatory.

Indexed as

Brain deathEthicsHigh-risk pregnancyMedical decision-makingOrdinary and extraordinary means

Identifiers

PMID32431420
PMCPMC6880068

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.