Premium
EFNS Task Force on postgraduate neurological training Survey of the current situation of postgraduate neurological training in Europe
Author(s) -
Pontes Celso
Publication year - 2001
Publication title -
european journal of neurology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.881
H-Index - 124
eISSN - 1468-1331
pISSN - 1351-5101
DOI - 10.1046/j.1468-1331.2001.00248.x
Subject(s) - medicine , training (meteorology) , task force , task (project management) , medical education , physical medicine and rehabilitation , physical therapy , management , physics , public administration , meteorology , political science , economics
In May 1996, the Education Committee of the EFNS appointed a Task Force to examine postgraduate neurological training in the dierent European countries, in order to further development of a core curriculum and guidelines for clinical practice training in this area. The ®nal aim is to achieve a uniform curriculum for the European Specialty in Neurology. The Task Force was duly set up and a questionnaire was sent with a covering letter from the Educational Committee to all EFNS member societies, the European Board of Neurology and task force members. The questionnaire addressed three main issues. To what extent is neurology considered an important and independent specialty? What is the pre-clinical education in neurology background? How is the postgraduate education performed? Thirty-six countries were included in this survey: Albania, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, UK, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Moldavia, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the Ukraine. There were 47 replies from 29 countries. Regrettably, no information was received from seven (Belarus, Bulgaria, Finland, Iceland, Moldavia, Russia and the Ukraine). After receiving the answers, we realized that the questions could have been better formulated. Some were not clear enough and others could be answered in two dierent ways. However, the majority of the repliers were able to overcome these diculties.