Do Medical Miracles Exist? A Systematic Review of Unanticipated Recovery from Coma as Portrayed in the Media
Alexander Scott1, Rebecca Stafford1, Isabelle Xu1, Ali Daneshmand2, Brian Coffey1, Ika Noviawaty1, David Greer2
1Boston Medical Center, 2Boston University School of Medicine
Objective:

We sought to assess the characterization of “miraculous” coma recovery in public media to elucidate the underlying causes and diagnostic testing.

Background:

In the last 50 years, over 10,000 media articles have been published about individuals who made “miraculous” recoveries from comatose states, with the frequency increasing over time. These articles, although sensational, are most often devoid of crucial medical details, reducing the complex conversation around coma to an overly simplistic narrative.

Design/Methods:

Using the Nexis Uni database, we conducted a review of newspapers and websites referencing “miraculous” recovery from coma between 1/1/1980 and 10/1/2024. Our inclusion criteria consisted of articles from the top 50 most-trafficked news outlets that included the words "coma," "comatose," "recovery," or "miracle."

Results:

A total of 122 distinct media articles were reviewed. The median age of patients was 26 years (IQR 16.25-40) with a median coma duration of 14 days (IQR 7-54.25); the majority were men (55.1%). Most articles (51.6%) referenced traumatic etiologies of coma, of which a third (34.9%) were medically-induced. Almost a third of the overall cohort (32.7%) referenced medically-induced comas. Objective tests such as MRI (3.27%), CT (3.27%), and EEG (2.46%) were rarely referenced. Additionally, documentation of a neurological evaluation by someone with neurological expertise occurred in less than a quarter (24.5%).

Conclusions:

Our study highlights a growing dilemma in post-coma care. While media articles may be intended to inspire hope, they are often sensational and devoid of critical details, which can cause confusion and provide false hope for families facing critical goals-of-care conversations. Broadcasting misdiagnoses and incorrect or inadequate prognostication may foster distrust of clinicians when the chance of meaningful recovery is implausible. For healthcare providers navigating these discussions, understanding the content of these articles and educating families on the differences may alleviate ambiguity and reduce unnecessary suffering and moral distress.

10.1212/WNL.0000000000211865
Disclaimer: Abstracts were not reviewed by Neurology® and do not reflect the views of Neurology® editors or staff.