The challenges facing neurology, neurosurgery, and the neurosciences

Thomas R. Swift, James I. Ausman

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Neurology as a distinct specialty is relatively new in the history of medicine. Beginning with Charcot, who built his neurology on a firm phenomenologic basis, the specialty of neurology was developed rapidly by such outstanding clinicians as Babinski, Duchenne, Erb, Marie,and Hughlings Jackson. In the 19th century, clinical observations increasingly were linked to neuroanatomical substrates. At the turn of the century, neuropathology gained a foothold, and clinical methods were developed further by such luminaries as Ramón y Cajal. Primitive laboratory procedures began to relate spinal fluid and brain electrical changes to human disease. A cadre of superb clinicians emerged, and neurology departments began to appear at medical schools, where residents were taught to interpret signs and symptoms carefully at the bedside. Mentored by superb clinicians, but lacking definitive laboratory and imaging procedures, these young neurologists continued the tradition of a specialty renowned for deductive reasoning. Neurologists were able to predict things other physicians could not, often with startling accuracy. But the specialty was plagued by lack of definitive studies to confirm clinical impressions, and an even more pervasive paucity of treatments for most neurologic conditions which exacted such a heavy human toll. Crude laboratory and radiologic tests, including angiography, were the only tools available. The clinicopathologic conference was in its heyday, and unexpected and startling revelations frequently were made at the autopsy table.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1814-1816
Number of pages3
JournalArchives of Neurology
Volume62
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2005

Fingerprint

Neurosurgery
Neurology
Neurosciences
History of Medicine
Medical Schools
Nervous System
Signs and Symptoms
Autopsy
Angiography
Physicians
Neuroscience
Brain
Clinicians
Neurologists
Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

The challenges facing neurology, neurosurgery, and the neurosciences. / Swift, Thomas R.; Ausman, James I.

In: Archives of Neurology, Vol. 62, No. 12, 01.12.2005, p. 1814-1816.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{4617d11d44374fd5955ada021caae570,
title = "The challenges facing neurology, neurosurgery, and the neurosciences",
abstract = "Neurology as a distinct specialty is relatively new in the history of medicine. Beginning with Charcot, who built his neurology on a firm phenomenologic basis, the specialty of neurology was developed rapidly by such outstanding clinicians as Babinski, Duchenne, Erb, Marie,and Hughlings Jackson. In the 19th century, clinical observations increasingly were linked to neuroanatomical substrates. At the turn of the century, neuropathology gained a foothold, and clinical methods were developed further by such luminaries as Ram{\'o}n y Cajal. Primitive laboratory procedures began to relate spinal fluid and brain electrical changes to human disease. A cadre of superb clinicians emerged, and neurology departments began to appear at medical schools, where residents were taught to interpret signs and symptoms carefully at the bedside. Mentored by superb clinicians, but lacking definitive laboratory and imaging procedures, these young neurologists continued the tradition of a specialty renowned for deductive reasoning. Neurologists were able to predict things other physicians could not, often with startling accuracy. But the specialty was plagued by lack of definitive studies to confirm clinical impressions, and an even more pervasive paucity of treatments for most neurologic conditions which exacted such a heavy human toll. Crude laboratory and radiologic tests, including angiography, were the only tools available. The clinicopathologic conference was in its heyday, and unexpected and startling revelations frequently were made at the autopsy table.",
author = "Swift, {Thomas R.} and Ausman, {James I.}",
year = "2005",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1001/archneur.62.12.1814",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "62",
pages = "1814--1816",
journal = "Archives of Neurology",
issn = "0003-9942",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The challenges facing neurology, neurosurgery, and the neurosciences

AU - Swift, Thomas R.

AU - Ausman, James I.

PY - 2005/12/1

Y1 - 2005/12/1

N2 - Neurology as a distinct specialty is relatively new in the history of medicine. Beginning with Charcot, who built his neurology on a firm phenomenologic basis, the specialty of neurology was developed rapidly by such outstanding clinicians as Babinski, Duchenne, Erb, Marie,and Hughlings Jackson. In the 19th century, clinical observations increasingly were linked to neuroanatomical substrates. At the turn of the century, neuropathology gained a foothold, and clinical methods were developed further by such luminaries as Ramón y Cajal. Primitive laboratory procedures began to relate spinal fluid and brain electrical changes to human disease. A cadre of superb clinicians emerged, and neurology departments began to appear at medical schools, where residents were taught to interpret signs and symptoms carefully at the bedside. Mentored by superb clinicians, but lacking definitive laboratory and imaging procedures, these young neurologists continued the tradition of a specialty renowned for deductive reasoning. Neurologists were able to predict things other physicians could not, often with startling accuracy. But the specialty was plagued by lack of definitive studies to confirm clinical impressions, and an even more pervasive paucity of treatments for most neurologic conditions which exacted such a heavy human toll. Crude laboratory and radiologic tests, including angiography, were the only tools available. The clinicopathologic conference was in its heyday, and unexpected and startling revelations frequently were made at the autopsy table.

AB - Neurology as a distinct specialty is relatively new in the history of medicine. Beginning with Charcot, who built his neurology on a firm phenomenologic basis, the specialty of neurology was developed rapidly by such outstanding clinicians as Babinski, Duchenne, Erb, Marie,and Hughlings Jackson. In the 19th century, clinical observations increasingly were linked to neuroanatomical substrates. At the turn of the century, neuropathology gained a foothold, and clinical methods were developed further by such luminaries as Ramón y Cajal. Primitive laboratory procedures began to relate spinal fluid and brain electrical changes to human disease. A cadre of superb clinicians emerged, and neurology departments began to appear at medical schools, where residents were taught to interpret signs and symptoms carefully at the bedside. Mentored by superb clinicians, but lacking definitive laboratory and imaging procedures, these young neurologists continued the tradition of a specialty renowned for deductive reasoning. Neurologists were able to predict things other physicians could not, often with startling accuracy. But the specialty was plagued by lack of definitive studies to confirm clinical impressions, and an even more pervasive paucity of treatments for most neurologic conditions which exacted such a heavy human toll. Crude laboratory and radiologic tests, including angiography, were the only tools available. The clinicopathologic conference was in its heyday, and unexpected and startling revelations frequently were made at the autopsy table.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=28944453401&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=28944453401&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/archneur.62.12.1814

DO - 10.1001/archneur.62.12.1814

M3 - Review article

C2 - 16344339

AN - SCOPUS:28944453401

VL - 62

SP - 1814

EP - 1816

JO - Archives of Neurology

JF - Archives of Neurology

SN - 0003-9942

IS - 12

ER -