This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Matthew Menken, MD

Arch Neurol. 1995;52(2):206-208.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

IN MODERN thought, a controversy is a disagreement in matters of opinion, in which participants seek to persuade others of the soundness of their viewpoints. Throughout our cultural tradition, however, controversy has long been given status as an important and valid method of inquiry in pursuit of knowledge, most often under the rubric of dialectic. The success of controversy as an educational tool is predicated on an agreed meaning of decisive terms. Thus, the present controversy requires an unambiguous definition of a consultant, and a clear understanding of such terms as principal care and primary care, which are often confused.¹

There is little doubt that neurologists have historically functioned as consultants in health care delivery. In health services research, a consultant is a physician whose patients are referred into the practice by another physician or agency, rather than by selfreferral.² Consultations are patient encounters in which a physician's . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
From the World Federation of Neurology Research Group on Medical Education and the Departments of Medicine and Neurology, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, New Brunswick.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati     What's this?