 |
|
Invited Critique: Rural Surgery
W. P. Ritchie, Jr, MD, PhD
Philadelphia, Pa
Arch Surg. 2000;135:123.
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
Brian J. Waddle, MD, has issued a sincere challenge to those charged with the oversight of graduate medical education in surgery, especially the Residency Review Committee for Surgery and the American Board of Surgery. In it, he appeals to them to create what he and others before him believe is sorely needed: a special training track in general surgery aimed at those who wish to undertake a rural practice of surgery. At the same time, his title suggests that he may harbor some degree of ambivalence about the issue by tacitly admitting that there may be some downsides to this approach. That ambivalence is certainly shared by others, myself among them.
The American Board of Surgery and the Residency Review Committee have long believed that the end point of residency training in general surgery is to produce an individual who has been widely and . . . [Full Text of this Article]
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLES
Rural Surgery: Opportunity or Minefield
Brian J. Waddle
Arch Surg. 2000;135(2):121-122.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Invited Critique: Rural Surgery
Mike Damp
Arch Surg. 2000;135(2):122.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Invited Critique: Rural Surgery
Irwin Faris
Arch Surg. 2000;135(2):124.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Invited Critique: Rural Surgery
William G. Rainer, Jr
Arch Surg. 2000;135(2):124.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Invited Critique: Rural Surgery
Frederic G. Inglis
Arch Surg. 2000;135(2):125.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
