Neuroweb.us Website Review

o provide the reader a quick, updated and reliable insight in the potential differential diagnosis of commonly (and less commonly) their residency training in neurology and young neurologists. However I am convinced that many of my fellow colleagues will find some of the he most frustrating thing for young clinicians is to learn about common and rare neurological diseases and to find out later that the presentation in ad*lts is totally different than that in children. Hence I attempted to clearly delineate the clinical picture in ad*lts. More importantly the information is regularly updated by core journals in Neurology (such as Neurology, Annals of Neurology, European Neurology, Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, Journal of Neurosciences, Current Opinion in Neurology) and Internal Medicine (New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet). No effort has been spared to include the most recent described disease entities and their criteria for diagnosis, giving neurology a dimension different from what is perceived from clas*ical textbooks. Finally, no algorithm is perfect and is not intended to cover all circu*stances. Hence there will still be situations where the exercise is doubtful. It is then up besides critical thinking, time often will lead you to the right diagnosis. he content is organized as such that following the identification of a recognizable neurological syndrome, an algorithm of differential diagnoses is provided together with the appropriate diagnostic tests. To facilitate the understanding of the algorithms a short up-to-date description of the disease or syndrome is given by hyperlink. I have tried to focus as much as possible on the most common neurological signs and symptoms or syndromes (e.g. akinetic-rigid syndrome, headache in the elderly, myoclonus etc. ), which explains why the list is not exhaustive. As the reader might notice quite some emphasis has been put on adding genetic information wherever available. The reason