MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2178935847 · doi:10.1093/qjmed/hcv163

When does a human being die?

2015· letter· en· W2178935847 on OpenAlexaff
John Riefler, Maxim Kosov, Maxim Belotserkovskiy

Bibliographic record

VenueQJM · 2015
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Donation and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Aging
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCenter (category theory)PhilosophyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To the Editor: We read with interest the review ‘When does a human being die?’1 Opinions vary on this topic. According to Gary Gronseth, M.D., professor and vice chair of neurology at the University of Kansas Medical Center, ‘brain death is as valid a definition of death, as if your heart had stopped beating. If you're brain dead, you're dead’.2 Brainstem death results in no brain stem activity and causes permanent loss in consciousness and the capacity to breathe. Catastrophic brain injury refers to acute severe brain injury, with intracranial bleeding or cerebral contusions that may lead to death. In boxing, about 10 deaths per year have occurred during the twentieth century; most related to knockout or technical knockout. The most common cause of death is subdural hematoma.3 During infectious diseases fellowship, one of us consulted a 25-year-old African American boxer who had catastrophic brain injury and a fever (40°C). Knocked out in an amateur boxing match, this patient went back to his training room and collapsed. On admission, he was comatose (Glasgow Coma Score = 3). For all intents and purposes, this patient was brain dead when he came to the hospital or even in the locker room. Yet, by using an organismic, denouement definition of death, as Schofield et al. propose, this subject would still be considered alive. The search for the source of fever was futile, since this patient’s brain thermoregulatory center was scrambled beyond repair.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0290.046
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.007

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQJMSame topicOrgan Donation and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207