ArticleNeurocritical care2022
The Uniform Determination of Death Act is Being Revised.
Article in Neurocritical care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Investigation into the Public's Attitude Toward Opting out of Brain Death.Neurocritical care · 2025Article
- Addressing the Problem of Brain Death Misdiagnosis.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2025Article
- The Quest to Revise the Uniform Determination of Death Act: Why We Tried, Why We Failed, and Where We Go from Here.Neurocritical care · 2024Article
- Perspectives of Medical Organizations, Organ Procurement Organizations, and Advocacy Organizations About Revising the Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA).Neurocritical care · 2024Review
- Article
- Donor heart refusal after circulatory death: An analysis of United Network for Organ Sharing refusal codes.JTCVS open · 2024Article
- New developments in guidelines for brain death/death by neurological criteria.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2024Review
- Reader Response: Challenges to Brain Death in Revising the Uniform Determination of Death Act: The UDDA Revision Series.Neurology · 2024Article
- Potential Threats and Impediments to the Clinical Practice of Brain Death Determination: The UDDA Revision Series.Neurology · 2023Article
- What Is the Ideal Brain Criterion of Death? Nonclinical Considerations: The UDDA Revision Series.Neurology · 2023Article
- Response to Machado re: Revisions to the Uniform Determination of Death Act and Other Controversial Aspects of the Determination of Death by Neurologic Criteria.Neurocritical care · 2023Article
- Complexity of human death: its physiological, transcriptomic, and microbiological implications.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA), the recommended legal statute for determination of death in the United States, was initially formulated in 1981. Forty years later, because of the concerns of experts in medicine, law, ethics, and philosophy, the Uniform Law Commission (ULC) created a drafting committee to update the UDDA. The drafting committee, which has until 2023 to propose revisions to the ULC Executive Committee, will need to determine how to address the following key questions about the UDDA: (1) Should the term "irreversible" be replaced by the term "permanent"? (2) Is absence of hypothalamic-pituitary-axis-induced antidiuretic hormone secretion included in "all functions of the entire brain," and if so, how can we reconcile the fact that this is not tested in the medical standards for determination of death by neurologic criteria published by the American Academy of Neurology and the Society of Critical Care Medicine, American Academy of Pediatrics, and Child Neurology Society? (3) What are the accepted medical standards for determination of death? (4) Is consent needed to determine death? and (5) How should objections to the use of neurologic criteria to declare death be handled? Once the ULC finalizes revisions to the UDDA, individual states will have the opportunity to decide whether to adopt the revisions in whole or in part. Hopefully, the revised UDDA will provide clarity and consistency about the legal distinction between life and death for physicians, lawyers, and the public at large. The events that led to the formation of the drafting committee and the potential consequences of revising the UDDA are discussed herein.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35102538What 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.