ReviewFrontiers in psychiatry2023
Forensic, legal, and clinical aspects of deaths associated with implanted cardiac devices.
Review in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As the population ages, the prevalence of heart failure and individuals wearing an implanted cardiac device is increasing. The combination of different underlying pathophysiologies and (the combination of) implanted cardiac devices can become a challenge with regard to the determination of cause and manner of death in such individuals. Additionally, heart disease is frequently associated with mental disease, ranging from anxiety and depression to suicidality and suicide (attempts). At the same time, the correct diagnosis of cause and manner of death is the basis for quality assurance, further therapeutic advances, legal safety, and suicide prevention. By that, an interdisciplinary field between legal medicine, clinicians, and law enforcement opens up. In this field, the different participants can simultaneously benefit from and need each other. For example, legal medicine experts need investigatory results and clinical expertise for the interpretation of readout data of implanted cardiac devices in order to correctly determine the cause of death. A correctly determined cause of death can assist law enforcement and help clinicians to further improve various therapeutic approaches based on correct mortality data collection. In addition, it is the basis for identification of suicides of device carriers, allowing psychological and psychiatric experts to better understand the burden of mental disease in this particular cohort. Against this interdisciplinary background, this manuscript summarizes information about psychiatric comorbidities and suicidality while being on a device. Thereby, basic information on complications and malfunctions of implanted cardiac devices, device-associated deaths with particular emphasis on device manipulation is displayed as basic information needed for correct determination of the cause of death. Also, legal and ethical issues in this field are outlined. The final result is a proposal of an interdisciplinary assessment workflow for a conjoint approach to improve the diagnosis of deaths associated with implanted cardiac devices. It will allow for a differentiation between an individual who died with or due to the device.
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.