MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Brain death

2016· book-chapter· en· W4247614440 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jeanne Teitelbaum, Sam D. Shemie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Donation and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Death determined by neurological criteria, or brain death, is better understood as brain arrest, or the final clinical expression of complete and irreversible neurological failure. Despite widespread national, international, and legal acceptance of brain death, substantial variation exists in the definition of the concept as well as in the standards for its diagnosis, and their application. The United States, Australia and New Zealand all focus on a whole-brain formulation to define brain death, whereas in the United Kingdom, a brainstem formulation of death is adopted. In Canada, either definition is allowed so long as the clinical criteria are met. The diagnosis of brain death is based on a clinical assessment performed when specific pre-conditions have been met and confounding factors addressed. Minimum clinical criteria include an established aetiology capable of causing neurological death with definite clinical or neuroimaging evidence, deep unresponsive coma with bilateral absence of motor responses (excluding spinal reflexes), absent brainstem reflexes as defined by absent gag and cough reflexes, absence of corneal responses, absent pupillary responses to light with pupils at mid-size or greater and absent vestibulo-ocular responses (caloric testing), absent respiratory effort confirmed by an apnoea test, and absent confounding factors such as hypothermia, depressant medications, neuromuscular blockers, neuromuscular disease, or severe reversible metabolic or endocrine disturbances (severe glucose, thyroid, sodium, or cortisol abnormalities). This chapter reviews the history of neurologically determined death and the specific criteria and requirements for diagnosis, paying special attention to areas of controversy and practice inconsistency.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.013

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 head0.265
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOrgan Donation and Transplantation→French-language works237,207→