Survival of Cardiac Function after Brain Death in Patients in Kuwait
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Persistent cessation of all cerebral and brainstem function (brain death) is accepted in most countries as legal evidence of death. It is presumed that cardiac function will cease within a short time after brain death has occurred. In some countries, such as Kuwait, tradition and practice discourage application of the brain death criteria despite legal acceptance. OBJECTIVE: The study was designed to assess the duration of persistence of cardiac function in patients after the diagnosis of brain death had been made on the basis of generally accepted criteria. METHODS: We evaluated how long cardiac function persisted after brain function had ceased in 40 patients in Kuwait who were admitted to hospital and died during the 10-year period 1992-2001. RESULTS: It was found that the mean persistence of cardiac function after brain death was 8.20 days and the median survival time was 6 days. Two thirds of the patients survived longer than a week, but none had cardiac function for longer than 30 days. CONCLUSION: The study confirms that brain death is not automatically followed immediately by cessation of all other body functions. It may be speculated therefore that whole-body homeostasis is not as intimately associated with brain function as has hitherto been thought.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".