Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40510874›Full record

ArticleNeurology. Clinical practice2025

A Qualitative Analysis of Physician Communication During Brain Death Conversations: Dead With a Heartbeat.

Anoushka Rao, Jason X Shen, Paul Graham Fisher, David Magnus

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurology. Clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Anoushka RaoCenter for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University School of Medicine, CA; and.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0428-9254
Jason X ShenCenter for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University School of Medicine, CA; and.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7862-863X
Paul Graham FisherDepartment of Pediatric Neurology, Stanford University School of Medicine, CA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1196-1590
David MagnusCenter for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University School of Medicine, CA; and.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0528-7341

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objectives: In recent decades, many legal cases have resulted from physicians ineffectively communicating to a family that their loved one is brain dead (brain dead/death by neurologic criteria [BD/DNC]). Although the definition of BD/DNC has recently undergone revision, little research has been conducted to establish optimal approaches in communicating BD/DNC status to families. The aim of this study was to characterize what highly experienced physicians perceive to be the best communication practices and language choices during BD/DNC conversations. Methods: In this qualitative study, we conducted semistructured, in-depth interviews with physician leaders in the field of BD/DNC between September 2023 and January 2024. All interviews were conducted through Zoom. Twenty expert physician participants were recruited from multiple institutions across the United States through convenience sampling. Participants were current or former attending physicians whose practices at academic institutions involved communication with families about BD/DNC in either the pediatric or adult setting. Participants completed a Qualtrics form containing questions about their demographic background and practice characteristics, including an estimate of the number of times they communicated BD/DNC to patient families. Semistructured interviews were conducted with each of the participants and included hypothetical scenarios and views about best practices. Results: Using 20 qualitative interview transcripts, we identified multiple areas of agreement and disagreement among expert physicians regarding best practices in communicating BD/DNC status. While physicians concurred on specific language to use and avoid, they differed on whether to use the word "coma," on when to introduce the possibility of brain death, and on whether to analogize with cardiac death. There was strong agreement on the utility of visualization through imaging and family attendance at BD/DNC testing. Finally, physicians were in consensus that multiple family meetings with the same providers are crucial for successful BD/DNC communication. Discussion: This study described main convergences and divergences in physician language during BD/DNC conversations and used qualitative data to present a "train journey" theory of ideal physician communication with families. By investigating and improving physician communication styles during BD/DNC conversations, the medical community may ameliorate the legal and medical fallout that results from clinical miscommunication.

Identifiers

PMID40510874
PMCPMC12153502

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.