Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Xenotransplantation: Injustice, Harm, and Alternatives for Addressing the Organ Crisis.

The Hastings Center report·2025
Same author

Individual difference factors that predict evaluations and acceptance of authorized concealment for the reduction of nocebo side effects.

Patient education and counseling·2025
Same author

Clinical trials are not the solution to inequities in cancer care.

Gynecologic oncology·2025
Same author

The Uniform Determination of Death Act is Not Changing. Will Physicians Continue to Misdiagnose Brain Death?

The American journal of bioethics : AJOB·2024
Same author

Are Patients With Cancer Best Managed in a Clinical Trial?

JAMA·2024
Same author

The Use of Authorized Concealment to Minimize Nocebo Side Effects: A Survey of US Public Attitudes.

Psychotherapy and psychosomatics·2023

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Dec 16, 2025

Brain Death Induction in Mice Using Intra-Arterial Blood Pressure Monitoring and Ventilation via Tracheostomy
05:03

Brain Death Induction in Mice Using Intra-Arterial Blood Pressure Monitoring and Ventilation via Tracheostomy

Published on: April 17, 2020

5.8K

Current Practice Diagnosing Brain Death Is Not Consistent With Legal Statutes Requiring the Absence of All Brain

Michael Nair-Collins1, Franklin G Miller2

  • 1Behavioral Sciences and Social Medicine, Florida State University College of Medicine, Tallahassee, FL, USA.

Journal of Intensive Care Medicine
|July 7, 2020
PubMed
Summary

The Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA) defines death by neurologic criteria as the irreversible cessation of the entire brain. Current practices may conflict with this standard, necessitating careful consideration of brain function in death determination.

Keywords:
Uniform Determination of Death Actbrain deathdeath determined by neurological criteriahypothalamusmisdiagnosisspecificity

More Related Videos

SECONDs Administration Guidelines: A Fast Tool to Assess Consciousness in Brain-injured Patients
11:05

SECONDs Administration Guidelines: A Fast Tool to Assess Consciousness in Brain-injured Patients

Published on: February 6, 2021

16.5K
Assessment and Communication for People with Disorders of Consciousness
07:37

Assessment and Communication for People with Disorders of Consciousness

Published on: August 1, 2017

9.5K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Dec 16, 2025

Brain Death Induction in Mice Using Intra-Arterial Blood Pressure Monitoring and Ventilation via Tracheostomy
05:03

Brain Death Induction in Mice Using Intra-Arterial Blood Pressure Monitoring and Ventilation via Tracheostomy

Published on: April 17, 2020

5.8K
SECONDs Administration Guidelines: A Fast Tool to Assess Consciousness in Brain-injured Patients
11:05

SECONDs Administration Guidelines: A Fast Tool to Assess Consciousness in Brain-injured Patients

Published on: February 6, 2021

16.5K
Assessment and Communication for People with Disorders of Consciousness
07:37

Assessment and Communication for People with Disorders of Consciousness

Published on: August 1, 2017

9.5K

Area of Science:

  • Neurology
  • Medical Ethics
  • Forensic Medicine

Background:

  • The Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA) legally defines death by neurologic criteria.
  • This standard requires the irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain.
  • Current clinical practices in determining death by neurologic criteria may not fully align with the UDDA's "whole-brain" standard.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To analyze the consistency between current practices for determining death by neurologic criteria and the legal standard set by the UDDA.
  • To examine the debate surrounding the inclusion of hypothalamic function within the "entire brain" definition under the UDDA.
  • To advocate for logical and scientifically accurate refinement of death determination practices.

Main Methods:

  • Review of the Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA) and its legal definition of death by neurologic criteria.
  • Analysis of current clinical practices and guidelines, including those from the American Academy of Neurology.
  • Examination of scientific and ethical arguments regarding the scope of "entire brain" in neurologic determination of death.

Main Results:

  • Discrepancies exist between the UDDA's "whole-brain" standard and some current clinical determinations of death by neurologic criteria.
  • Some patients diagnosed as brain-dead may retain residual brain function or the potential for recovery.
  • The American Academy of Neurology's guidelines suggest hypothalamic function aligns with the UDDA, a point of ongoing debate.

Conclusions:

  • Continued dialogue and refinement of practices for determining death by neurologic criteria are essential.
  • Such dialogue must be grounded in logical reasoning and scientific accuracy.
  • The definition of "entire brain" in the context of the UDDA requires careful consideration, particularly concerning hypothalamic and pituitary function.