↓ Skip to main content

Circulatory Arrest, Brain Arrest and Death Determination

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Circulatory Arrest, Brain Arrest and Death Determination
Published in
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fcvm.2018.00015
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sam David Shemie, Dale Gardiner

Abstract

Technological advances, particularly in the capacity to support, replace or transplant failing organs, continue to challenge and refine our understanding of human death. Given the ability to reanimate organs before and after death, both inside and outside of the body, through reinstitution of oxygenated circulation, concepts related to death of organs (e.g. cardiac death) are no longer valid. This paper advances the rationale for a single conceptual determination of death related to permanent brain arrest, resulting from primary brain injury or secondary to circulatory arrest. The clinical characteristics of brain arrest are the permanent loss of capacity for consciousness and loss of all brainstem functions. In the setting of circulatory arrest, death occurs after the arrest of circulation to the brain rather than death of the heart. Correspondingly, any intervention that resumes oxygenated circulation to the brain after circulatory arrest would invalidate the determination of death.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 18%
Other 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 5%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 20 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Psychology 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 24 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 April 2018.
All research outputs
#15,494,712
of 23,026,672 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
#2,617
of 6,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,303
of 333,594 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
#25
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,026,672 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,934 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,594 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.