You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 59 No. 5, May 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Book Reviews
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 • Reply to article
 •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
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

New Oxford Textbook of Psychiatry, vols 1 and 2

edited by Michael G. Gelder, Juan J. Lopez-Ibor, Jr, MD, and Nancy C. Andreason, MD, PhD, 2938 pp, $249, ISBN 0-19-262970-0, New York, NY, Oxford University Press, 2000.

Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2002;59:476-477.

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

Creating a textbook of general psychiatry at the beginning of the 21st century requires many tough choices. First, identifying the intended audience—medical students, residents, members of the profession, or others. Second, is the book to be written by one person or a small group with a single voice and "philosophy," or by many different experts, sacrificing coherence and a consistent perspective for subspecialty excellence? Third, what are the appropriate boundaries of contemporary psychiatry? There may be agreement at the core, but should a psychiatry text include molecular genetics, neuroimaging, basic statistics, health economics, hospital administration? Related to this, many areas of psychiatry are defined and described in accordance with conventions that vary from country to country and region to region. Should the text use DSM-IV, ICD-10, both, or neither? Is the discussion of treatment by a shaman to be classified as a standard therapy or a cultural variant? . . . [Full Text of this Article]



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





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2002 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.