Current status of neurology grand rounds

Richard K. Choi, David S. Tabby, Andrea L. Rosso, Paul S. Mueller, Robert J. Schwartzman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Scopus citations


Objective: We sought to compare the current status of Neurologic Grand Rounds (NGRs) in training programs with the status observed in Medical Grand Rounds. Methods: A survey was sent to 124 departments of neurology in the United States that are accredited by the American Council of Graduate Medical Education via an online Web tool. We collected data regarding the attendance, objectives, format, educational structure, and perceived changes and trends over time. Results: Seventy-five (60%) surveys were returned: 10% were completed by the department chairperson, 4% by the chief resident, and 54% by another faculty member. NGRs were offered by 99% of the programs surveyed, and 95% of the programs conduct NGRs accredited for Continuing Medical Education. Almost all of the respondents agreed that the education of faculty, house staff, and full-time faculty was very important. Ninety-three percent of the programs hold clinical case presentations, and 60% have patients in attendance for the presentation. Programs reported that the quality, importance, and educational value of NGRs had either not changed or had increased over time (94%, 91%, and 89%, respectively). Conclusion: NGRs continue to be an important component of neurology residency training programs. The results of our survey were comparable to those obtained by others studying Medical Grand Rounds. Objectives, components, attendance, format, changes, and trends were also similar.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)308-312
Number of pages5
Issue number5
StatePublished - Sep 2010


  • CME
  • Grand Rounds
  • neurologic education
  • residents
  • students

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology


Dive into the research topics of 'Current status of neurology grand rounds'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this