FIG 1 - uploaded by Jubran H Jubran
Content may be subject to copyright.
A: Timeline of Dorothy Russell's professional life and achievements, especially those related to neurosurgery, including publication of her seminal texts. B: Russell (seated, second from the right) with the Perse School for Girls netball team, of which she was the first captain. Panel B used with permission from the British Neuropathological Society.
Source publication
Dorothy Russell’s contributions to neuropathology are pivotal in the evolution of modern neurosurgery. In an era preferential to men in medicine, she entered the second medical school class to include women at the London Hospital Medical College in 1919. In the laboratory of Hubert Turnbull, she met Hugh Cairns, who would become her professional ne...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... original research fellows at McGill's Royal Victoria Hospital in Montreal and her extraordinary career, which significantly influenced the development of neurosurgery, especially neurooncology (Fig. ...
Context 2
... 7,8 After her mother and father died within the space of 3 years, 8-year-old Dorothy went to live with her aunt and uncle outside Cambridge, England, along with three of her sisters. At the Perse School for Girls in Cambridge, she excelled in science, debate, and athletics, and in 1909 she was elected as head girl (valedictorian) by the students (Fig. 1B). 8 A close friend wrote fondly of their school years, "Dorothy was a remarkable girl. From the first time that I knew her […] she knew just what she wanted. She was determined to be a doctor-not a practicing doctor, but a research doctor." 9 After graduating from Cambridge University, Russell applied for admission to the London ...
Citations
... Jones was soon joined by Dorothy Russell from the London Hospital Medical College, who would become one of the 20th century's most distinguished neuropathologists. 1,45 Jones studied neuroglial cells and their relationship to brain tumors, and Russell studied the origin of microglia and their activity in the nervous system. Russell noted the exuberant atmosphere in the laboratory, recalling, "We grappled with the metallic methods of the Spanish school, which gave us a slant on the embryology and evolution of glial cells." 1 This work was the basis of Penfield's simplified classification of gliomas, which was adopted by the American Neurological Association. ...
Wilder Penfield is well known as the founder of the Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI), the site of his most important contributions to the investigation and treatment of epilepsy and to our understanding of the structure-function relationship of the brain. The seeds of the MNI were sown 6 years before its opening in 1934, when Penfield accepted the position of head of the Subdepartment of Neurosurgery at McGill University's Royal Victoria Hospital (RVH). Penfield took this position because of the facilities made available to him to pursue the neuropathological research that he had undertaken with Pío del Río Hortega in Madrid, and to continue his investigation into the nature and treatment of posttraumatic epilepsy that he began with Otfrid Foerster in Breslau. Penfield and his first neurosurgical research fellows Joseph Evans, Jerzy Choróbski, Nathan Norcross, Theodore Erickson, Isadore Tarlov, and Arne Torkildsen studied the substrate of focal epilepsy, the innervation of cortical arteries, the function of the diencephalon, the microscopic structure of spinal nerve roots, and the ventricular system in health and disease. In his 6 years at the RVH, Penfield and his fellows effected a paradigm shift that saw neurosurgery pass from empirical practice to scientific discipline.
In 1949, William Stewart Alexander (1919-2013), a young pathologist from New Zealand working in London, reported the neuropathological findings in a 15-month-old boy who had developed normally until the age of seven months, but thereafter had progressive enlargement of his head and severe developmental delay. The most striking neuropathological abnormality was the presence of numerous Rosenthal fibers in the brain. The distribution of these fibers suggested to Alexander that the primary pathological change involved astrocytes. In the next 15 years, five similar patients were reported, and in 1964 Friede recognized these cases reflected a single disease process and coined the eponym "Alexander's disease" to describe the disorder. In the 1960s, electron microscopy confirmed that Rosenthal fibers were localized to astrocytes. In 2001, it was shown that Alexander disease is caused by mutations in the gene encoding glial fibrillary acidic protein, the major intermediate filament protein in astrocytes. Although the clinical, imaging, and pathological manifestations of Alexander disease are now well known, few people are familiar with Alexander's career. Although he did not make a further contribution to the literature on Alexander disease, his observations and accurate interpretation of the neuropathology have justified the continued use of the eponym "Alexander disease."
topic covers training and education about neurosurgery
Background: The authors investigated perceived discrepancies between the neurosurgical research productivity of international medical graduates (IMGs) and US medical graduates (USMGs) through the perspective of program directors (PDs) and successfully matched IMGs.
Methods: Responses to 2 separate surveys on neurosurgical applicant research productivity in 115 neurosurgical programs and their PDs were analyzed. Neurosurgical research participation was analyzed using an IMG survey of residents who matched into neurosurgical residency within the previous 8 years. Productivity of IMGs conducting dedicated research at the study institution was also analyzed.
Results: Thirty-two of 115 (28%) PDs responded to the first research productivity survey and 43 (37%) to the second IMG research survey. PDs expected neurosurgery residency applicants to spend a median of 12-24 months on research (Q 1-Q 3 : 0-12 to 12-24; minimum time: 0-24; maximum time: 0-48) and publish a median of 5 articles (Q 1-Q3: 2-5 to 5-10; minimum number: 0-10; maximum number: 4-20). Among 43 PDs, 34 (79%) ranked "research institution or associated personnel" as the most important factor when evaluating IMGs' research. Forty-two of 79 (53%) IMGs responding to the IMG-directed survey reported a median of 30 months (Q 1-Q 3 : 18-48; range: 4-72) of neurosurgical research and 12 published articles (Q 1-Q 3 : 6-24; range: 1-80) before beginning neurosurgical residency. Twenty-two PDs (69%) believed IMGs completemore research than USMGs before residency. Of 20 IMGs conducting dedicated neuroscience/neurosurgery research at the study institution, 16 of 18 who applied matched or entered a US neurosurgical training program; 2 applied and entered a US neurosurgical clinical fellowship.
Conclusion: The research work of IMGs compared to USMGs who apply to neurosurgery residency exceeds PDs’ expectations regarding scientific output and research time. Many PDs perceive IMG research productivity before residency application as superior to USMGs. Although IMGs comprise a small percentage of trainees, they are responsible for a significant amount of US-published neurosurgical literature. Preresidency IMG research periods may be improved with dedicated mentoring and advising beginning before the research period, during the period, and
within a neurosurgery research department, providing a formal structure such as a research fellowship or graduate program for IMGs aspiring to train in the US.
