MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4367856342 · doi:10.1007/s12630-023-02427-0

Infratentorial brain injury and death by neurologic criteria in Canada: a narrative review

2023· review· en· W4367856342 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sam D. Shemie, Joel Neves Briard, J. Gordon Boyd, Tenielle Gofton, Andreas H. Kramer, Michaël Chassé, Shaurya Taran, Priti Gros, Jeffrey M. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d anesthésie · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Donation and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsTrillium Therapeutics (Canada)University Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoMontreal Children's HospitalWestern UniversityQueen's UniversityUniversité de MontréalUniversity of CalgaryCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityCanadian Blood ServicesMontreal Clinical Research Institute
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsMedicineContext (archaeology)BrainstemIntensive care medicineCause of deathNeuroimagingPathologyInternal medicinePsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are two anatomic formulations of death by neurologic criteria accepted worldwide: whole-brain death and brainstem death. As part of the Canadian Death Definition and Determination Project, we convened an expert working group and performed a narrative review of the literature. Infratentorial brain injury (IBI) with an unconfounded clinical assessment consistent with death by neurologic criteria represents a nonrecoverable injury. The clinical determination of death cannot distinguish between IBI and whole-brain cessation of function. Current clinical, functional, and neuroimaging assessments cannot reliably confirm the complete and permanent destruction of the brainstem. No patient with isolated brainstem death has been reported to recover consciousness and all patients have died. Studies suggest a significant majority of isolated brainstem death will evolve into whole-brain death, influenced by time/duration of somatic support and impacted by ventricular drainage and/or posterior fossa decompressive craniectomy. Acknowledging variability in intensive care unit (ICU) physician opinion on this matter, a majority of Canadian ICU physicians would perform ancillary testing for death determination by neurologic criteria in the context of IBI. There is currently no reliable ancillary test to confirm complete destruction of the brainstem; ancillary testing currently includes evaluation of both infratentorial and supratentorial flow. Acknowledging international variability in this regard, the existing evidence reviewed does not provide sufficient confidence that the clinical exam in IBI represents a complete and permanent destruction of the reticular activating system and thus the capacity for consciousness. On this basis, IBI consistent with clinical signs of death by neurologic criteria without significant supratentorial involvement does not fulfill criteria for death in Canada and ancillary testing is required.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.381
Threshold uncertainty score0.767

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0130.021
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d anesthésie→Same topicOrgan Donation and Transplantation→French-language works237,207→