What Should We Do About the Mismatch Between Legal Criteria for Death and How Brain Death Is Diagnosed
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 15744344 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Nathaniel M Robbins (0000-0002-1884-8275, Dartmouth College, corresponding author), James L Bernat (0000-0003-1128-0442, Dartmouth College) |
| Year | 2020 |
| Volume | 22 |
| Issue | 12 |
| Pages | E1038-1046 |
| Publication date | 2020-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The AMA Journal of Ethic (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2376-6980 • E-ISSN: 2376-6980 |
| Publisher | American Medical Association (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1001/amajethics.2020.1038 |
| PMID | 33419505 |
| OpenAlex | W3108892655 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 6 |
Mismatch between whole-brain death criteria embedded in statutes and accepted tests physicians use to diagnose brain death have clinical and ethical implications that could undermine public trust in death pronouncements. We consider merits and drawbacks of 4 ways to address this problem
Cause of death · Disease · Pathology · Political science · Statute · Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health · Law · Medicine · Organ Donation and Transplantation · Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues · Psychology
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |