PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-3 (3)
 

Clipboard (0)
None

Select a Filter Below

Journals
Year of Publication
Document Types
author:("jacuzzi, R.M.")
1.  Trends in American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology specialties and neurologic subspecialties 
Neurology  2010;75(12):1110-1117.
Objective: To review the current status and recent trends in the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology (ABPN) specialties and neurologic subspecialties and discuss the implications of those trends for subspecialty viability.
Methods: Data on numbers of residency and fellowship programs and graduates and ABPN certification candidates and diplomates were drawn from several sources, including ABPN records, Web sites of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and the American Medical Association, and the annual medical education issues of the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Results: About four-fifths of neurology graduates pursue fellowship training. While most recent neurology and child neurology graduates attempt to become certified by the ABPN, many clinical neurophysiologists elect not to do so. There appears to have been little interest in establishing fellowships in neurodevelopmental disabilities. The pass rate for fellowship graduates is equivalent to that for the “grandfathers” in clinical neurophysiology. Lower percentages of clinical neurophysiologists than specialists participate in maintenance of certification, and maintenance of certification pass rates are high.
Conclusion: The initial enthusiastic interest in training and certification in some of the ABPN neurologic subspecialties appears to have slowed, and the long-term viability of those subspecialties will depend upon the answers to a number of complicated social, economic, and political questions in the new health care era.
doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181f39a41
PMCID: PMC3463033  PMID: 20855855
ABMS = American Board of Medical Specialties; ABPN = American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology; ACGME = Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education; MOC = maintenance of certification; RRC-N = Residency Review Committee in Neurology.
2.  Subcutaneous IGF-1 is not beneficial in 2-year ALS trial 
Neurology  2008;71(22):1770-1775.
Background:
Previous human clinical trials of insulin-like growth factor type I (IGF-1) in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) have been inconsistent. This phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was undertaken to address whether IGF-1 benefited patients with ALS.
Methods:
A total of 330 patients from 20 medical centers were randomized to receive 0.05 mg/kg body weight of human recombinant IGF-1 given subcutaneously twice daily or placebo for 2 years. The primary outcome measure was change in their manual muscle testing score. Secondary outcome measures included tracheostomy-free survival and rate of change in the revised ALS functional rating scale. Intention to treat analysis was used.
Results:
There was no difference between treatment groups in the primary or secondary outcome measures after the 2-year treatment period.
Conclusions:
Insulin-like growth factor type I does not provide benefit for patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.
GLOSSARY
= amyotrophic lateral sclerosis;
= revised ALS functional rating scale;
= area under the curve;
= deep venous thromboses;
= insulin-like growth factor type I;
= manual muscle testing;
= pulmonary embolisms.
doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000335970.78664.36
PMCID: PMC2617770  PMID: 19029516
3.  Subcutaneous IGF-1 is not beneficial in 2-year ALS trial 
Neurology  2008;71(22):1770-1775.
Background
Previous human clinical trials of insulin-like growth factor type I (IGF-1) in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) have been inconsistent. This phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was undertaken to address whether IGF-1 benefited patients with ALS.
Methods
A total of 330 patients from 20 medical centers were randomized to receive 0.05 mg/kg body weight of human recombinant IGF-1 given subcutaneously twice daily or placebo for 2 years. The primary outcome measure was change in their manual muscle testing score. Secondary outcome measures included tracheostomy-free survival and rate of change in the revised ALS functional rating scale. Intention to treat analysis was used.
Results
There was no difference between treatment groups in the primary or secondary outcome measures after the 2-year treatment period.
Conclusions
Insulin-like growth factor type I does not provide benefit for patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.
doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000335970.78664.36
PMCID: PMC2617770  PMID: 19029516

Results 1-3 (3)