Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37528432›Full record

ArticlePhilosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM2023

Death pluralism: a proposal.

Gonzalo Díaz-Cobacho, Alberto Molina-Pérez, David Rodríguez-Arias

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Transcultural Care During the Dying Process: A Phenomenological Study of Nurses' Experiences.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
    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

3 authors.

Gonzalo Díaz-CobachoDepartment of Philosophy I, University of Granada, Granada, Spain. gdc@ugr.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3789-0003
Alberto Molina-PérezInstituto de Estudios Sociales Avanzados (IESA), CSIC, IESA-CSIC, Córdoba, Spain. amolina@iesa.csic.es.
David Rodríguez-AriasDepartment of Philosophy I, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The debate over the determination of death has been raging for more than fifty years. Since then, objections against the diagnosis of brain death from family members of those diagnosed as dead-have been increasing and are causing some countries to take novel steps to accommodate people's beliefs and preferences in the determination of death. This, coupled with criticism by some academics of the brain death criterion, raises some questions about the issues surrounding the determination of death. In this paper, we discuss some of the main approaches to death determination that have been theoretically proposed or currently put into practice and propose a new approach to death determination called "weak pluralism" as a reasonable ethical and political alternative to respect diversity in death determination.

Indexed as

BioethicsBrain DeathCultural DiversityHumansAccommodationBioethicsBrain deathPluralismReligion

Identifiers

PMID37528432
PMCPMC10394888

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.