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

ROY COHN, MD

AMA Arch Surg. 1974;108(6):763-764.

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

Flexner's original objections to the proprietary type of medical education that existed in the early part of this century were largely based on the abuses by the clinician of the educational system, especially with regard to conscientious teaching and research in clinical medicine. It was apparent at that time that in order for the clinical faculty to devote their full time to teaching and research as well as to multiple tasks of administration, and still be well paid, some outside form of financial subsidy was necessary. In the beginning of this era, the big foundations and generous donors contributed large sums of money. In the postwar period, the National Institutes of Health, under the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, subsidized the medical schools and the universities as well through the overhead charges in research grants. In the most recent past, as is well known, the changing political and social . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Department of Surgery Stanford University Medical Center Stanford, CA 94305

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