Potential Heart, Liver, and Kidney Donation after Circulatory Determination of Death in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pediatric organ donation after circulatory determination of death (DCD) has increased in recent years; however, there are few data reporting the number of neonatal potential DCD organ donors and no Canadian-specific reports. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to estimate the number of patients who may have become actual DCD organ donors from a single, tertiary neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) over 5 years. METHODS: We reviewed all medical charts of newborns ≥2.5 kg, who died in our center's NICU from January 2013 to December 2017. We determined how many could have become actual organ donors after brain death (DBD) or DCD based on 3 sets of organ-specific eligibility criteria defined as conservative, standard, and liberal. RESULTS: Of the 39 deceased patients, none met the criteria for DBD. Twenty-nine (75%) died after the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies. According to the conservative criteria, 1 patient would have been eligible for kidneys and liver donation. Three patients met standard criteria for kidneys and 1 for liver. Eight patients would have been eligible donors for kidneys, 7 for liver, and 2 for heart according to liberal criteria. Only 2 patients were evaluated for DCD, and no organ donation was performed. CONCLUSIONS: While uncommon, we identified potential DCD organ donors in the NICU population for kidney, heart, and liver transplants. The substantial variability in the number of potential donors depending on the selected eligibility criteria emphasizes the need for a standardized definition adapted to local capacities.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".