ReviewBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2020
[Brain death criterion and organ donation: current neuroscientific perspective].
Review in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
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
In academic and public debate, the meaning of irreversible loss of brain function as a reliable sign of death (brain death criterion) is repeatedly challenged. In the present article, six prototypical theses against the brain death criterion are discussed: 1) the nonsuperiority of brain versus other organs, 2) the unreliability of brain death diagnostics, 3) the preserved perception of pain in brain death, 4) the (spontaneous) sexual maturation and preserved reproductive function in brain death, 5) the symmetry of brain death and embryonic stage, and 6) the equalization of an artificially respired brain-dead body and a living human being.None of these theses withstand critical analysis. In Germany, the whole-brain death criterion is applied. Brain death involves the complete loss of all sensation, consciousness, as well as facial, ocular, lingual and pharyngeal motor, voluntary motor, and sexual function (functional "decapitation"). Other organs or their basic control can be replaced artificially, but not the brain. The brain, not the remaining body, is determinant of the human individual. The equalization of an artificially respired brain-dead organism, that may be considered as a living system from a natural philosophy point of view, and the organism of the same living human being leads, through reducibility of constituting organs, to an obvious absurdity. The irreversible loss of brain function results inevitably in cardiac arrest, spontaneously within minutes, with intensive care usually within days. In the embryo/fetus, malformation of the complete brain also results in (prenatal) death. The statutory guideline of the German Medical Association for the determination of brain death has, by comparison, high diagnostic reliability; no confirmed misdiagnoses have occurred.
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.