|
 |
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Correspondence: When an article is eligible for submission of Correspondence, a link to the response form is available within the full-text article. You must be a current subscriber who has activated the online portion of your subscription in order to send a Correspondence. Any reader can read published Correspondence.
Correspondence to:
|
|
Correspondence:Correspondence published:
-
![[Read Correspondence]](/icons/misc/sectionDOWN.gif)
Reply to Greenberg
- Matthew Rizzo, MD, William C. Mobley, MD (21 January 2005)
-
An AUPN/ANA survey of department leader opinions on the health of US academic neurology
- Jack O. Greenberg, MD (21 January 2005)
|
|
|||
|
Matthew Rizzo, MD, Department of Neurology, Carver College of Medicine, 2144 RCP, Iowa City, IA 52242, William C. Mobley, MD
Send Correspondence to journal:
matthew-rizzo{at}uiowa.edu Matthew Rizzo, MD, et al.
|
Dr. Greenberg raises concerns about a timely issue facing academic
and
clinical neurologists. MRS, fMRI and other emerging imaging techniques may
be highly relevant to neurological research and practice. Progress in
neurology patient care, research, teaching, faculty development, clinical
service, and program operations will require intense vigilance over the
coming years on many key issues. Academy members may keep abreast of these
issues by checking the American Academy of Neurology Federal Advocacy
website
( |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Jack O. Greenberg, MD, Clinical Professor of neurology and Neurosurgery, Drexel Medical School 293 Locust St. . Philadelplhia, PA 19106
Send Correspondence to journal:
jgreenb293{at}aol.com Jack O. Greenberg, MD
|
It was deja vu when I read the article by Rizzo and Mobley. [1] The authors state that the health is not good and the reason is, understandably, “financial pressures.” “Academic departments find themselves in the position of ‘feeding’ neurosurgery and neuroradiology, activities for which they may or may not be adequately compensated.” In the AAN “The First 50 Years”, [2] I described the difficulties practicing neurologists had in trying to convince academic neurologists (other than Oldendorf, Toole and Gilroy) that imaging is our field. To this day, the small group of neurologist-imagers (“neuroimagers”) remain practicing neurologists while academic departments, where research should be done, are poverty sticken. MRS (neurochemistry), fMRI (neurophysiology and behavioral neurology), and the rest of neuroimaging are in the hands of radiologists who make astronomical salaries while basic research in these fields suffers. It is not too late for academic neurology departments to obtain their own scanners (even if they have to work with the private sector) and hire their own neuroradiologists (and train their own neuroimagers) who should be in the neurology department and may secretly desire to be. References 1) Rizzo M, Mobley WC. An AUPN/ANA survey of department leader opinions on the health of US academic neurology Neurology 2004; 63: 1354-1356. 2) (pp. 276-302) |
|||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |