↓ Skip to main content


Article Metrics

Donation after cardiocirculatory death in Canada

Overview of attention for article published in Canadian Medical Association Journal, October 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

17 news outlets
1 Wikipedia page


157 Dimensions

Readers on

59 Mendeley
Donation after cardiocirculatory death in Canada
Published in
Canadian Medical Association Journal, October 2006
DOI 10.1503/cmaj.060895
Pubmed ID

S. D. Shemie, A. J. Baker, G. Knoll, W. Wall, G. Rocker, D. Howes, J. Davidson, J. Pagliarello, J. Chambers-Evans, S. Cockfield, C. Farrell, W. Glannon, W. Gourlay, D. Grant, S. Langevin, B. Wheelock, K. Young, J. Dossetor


These recommendations are the result of a national, multidisciplinary, year-long process to discuss whether and how to proceed with organ donation after cardiocirculatory death (DCD) in Canada. A national forum was held in February 2005 to discuss and develop recommendations on the principles, procedures and practice related to DCD, including ethical and legal considerations. At the forum's conclusion, a strong majority of participants supported proceeding with DCD programs in Canada. The forum also recognized the need to formulate and emphasize core values to guide the development of programs and protocols based on the medical, ethical and legal framework established at this meeting. Although end-of-life care should routinely include the opportunity to donate organs and tissues, the duty of care toward dying patients and their families remains the dominant priority of health care teams. The complexity and profound implications of death are recognized and should be respected, along with differing personal, ethnocultural and religious perspectives on death and donation. Decisions around withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies, management of the dying process and the determination of death by cardiocirculatory criteria should be separate from and independent of donation and transplant processes. The recommendations in this report are intended to guide individual programs, regional health authorities and jurisdictions in the development of DCD protocols. Programs will develop based on local leadership and advance planning that includes education and engagement of stakeholders, mechanisms to assure safety and quality and public information. We recommend that programs begin with controlled DCD within the intensive care unit where (after a consensual decision to withdraw life-sustaining therapy) death is anticipated, but has not yet occurred, and unhurried consent discussions can be held. Uncontrolled donation (where death has occurred after unanticipated cardiac arrest) should only be considered after a controlled DCD program is well established. Although we recommend that programs commence with kidney donation, regional transplant expertise may guide the inclusion of other organs. The impact of DCD, including pre-and post-mortem interventions, on donor family experiences, organ availability, graft function and recipient survival should be carefully documented and studied.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 58 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 25%
Student > Master 9 15%
Other 5 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 3 5%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 12 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 47%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 14 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 130. 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 06 February 2021.
All research outputs
of 16,968,502 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Medical Association Journal
of 7,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 284,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Medical Association Journal
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,968,502 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,297 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 284,974 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.