Neurology in Clinical Practice

Rating:
Summary: No Regrets Overall
Review: ...
Last year I read pretty much the whole 3rd edition cover to cover, so I feel qualified to comment. When I started, the appeal of this book for me was: (1) it looked fairly comprehensive, (2) it was well written, and (3) a lot of time was devoted to teaching ways of thinking and defining what, say, a neuro-urologist does, in addition to facts about diseases.

In regards to (1), I still think it is one of the most comprehensive books out there. But it is also the most verbose. The editors should mandate that contributors are not allowed to say anything that is self-evident, especially anything along the lines of "a multi-disciplinary approach is best" or "the likelihood ranges from 0-70%" or "starts with a thorough history and physical examination". Whole sections, even whole chapters are devoted to this kind of blather.

I agree ... that volume 1 is much better than volume 2. Volume 2 has some really really long and tedious chapters that could easily be (mediocre) textbooks unto themselves. Overall a book like Merritt's looks better for the neurological diseases than volume 2 at this point. I hope the editors take this to heart in the next edition and radically revise this volume.

In regards to (2) it is very well written and you'd be surprised what a difference that makes in terms of how enjoyable it is to read. Kudos to the editors on this.

In regards to (3) I continue to think the "more than just facts" approach make this an attractive book for residents looking for an introduction to the discipline. But as I said before, there are better books when it comes to concise and usable presentation of the neurological diseases.

There a few outright errors, but some serious omissions particuarly in the area of treatment, ...

A couple of other points are worth mentioning: (1) The question book is excellent. The questions are intelligent, and there are only a few mistakes in the entire book. Hats of to Misulis on this one. (2) The website is not as useful as you might think. It isn't updated all that much, and it is structured to thwart would-be copyright violators more than to facilitate easy use. Count on not being able to read more than a few paragraphs without jumping to a new link. In the next edition, I hope you can opt out of web access in exchange for a discount. ...

All in all I don't regret reading this book. I don't think there's another book out there that offers all that this book does, and if they can continue to improve it, it will become the standard text of neurology.

Rating:
Summary: A letdown....
Review: Any large 2 volume reference text certainly looks impressive. But, unfortunately, NICP is only superficially attractive. I have used this as a reference many times and have closed the book without gaining any satisfactory answers. Considering it's size and price, NICP is a huge letdown. The online subscription service is costly, but at least it gets continuously updated and has videos to boot.

Rating:
Summary: A letdown....
Review: Any large 2 volume reference text certainly looks impressive. But, unfortunately, NICP is only superficially attractive. I have used this as a reference many times and have closed the book without gaining any satisfactory answers. Considering it's size and price, NICP is a huge letdown. The online subscription service is costly, but at least it gets continuously updated and has videos to boot.

Rating:
Summary: About the comment below.
Review: I agree that the book is certainly (too?) expensive, but as to the remarks that it's incomplete in even essential details- I beg to differ. Incompleteness is not among NCP's pertinent characteristics.

Rating:
Summary: Understocked, overpriced
Review: I've used the book as a reference in neurology a number of times. On each occasion the contents provided a very nice general summary of the more basic information on the topic. Also in each case, critical and well established aspects of the clinical condition --- essential to decisionmaking --- were omitted from the text without even the slightest implied reference. Some of the missing information was "new" (last 4-5 years), much of it was not. A well written general survey of neurology for the medical student, the level of omission of significant or critical information suggests that even the family practitioner should exercise great caution in using it as a decision-making guide. Books that appear less complete, in the end, provide at least equal information and utility. Rated as high as 2* because the text is well written and the minimum of basic information is provided, though not at a level appropriate to a skilled neurologist.

Rating:
Summary: neurology in clinical practice
Review: if you have "nicp" at home you dont need to look for any articles in any of those (too many) journals published around . you will find all necessary information, including diagnosis, uptodate treatment, research, good studies about any topic you can imagine. This is the best tetbook for the neurologist of any generation.

Rating:
Summary: More expensive than its worth
Review: The book has some good chapters but overall, it cannot serve as a reference text. Bakers Neurology on CD ROM is almost half the price and packs much more information with excellent references.

Rating:
Summary: .
Review: This book is too highly priced, and fails to live up to expectations. A book this expensive should be a superb reference, with a comprehensiveness second to none. Nothing of the sort may be said about NICP. Diagnosis and treatment sections need serious expanding.

The best part of the book is Volume I. First rate chapters on the clinical approach, some of the best written, save the book from publishing purgatory.