Three 20th-Century Multiauthored Handbooks Serving as Vital Catalyzers of an Emerging Specialization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Originating in the late 19th century, psychiatry and neurology emerged during a period of several decades as two distinct fields of medical inquiry, separate from the study and practice of internal medicine. Around 1900, the German-speaking countries in Europe played an important role in this development. In this article, the publication of three influential multivolume and multiauthor handbooks are studied. All available volumes of Max Lewandowsky's Handbuch der Neurologie (1910-1914) and the Handbuch der Neurologie (1935-1937) of Oswald Bumke and Otfrid Foerster are analyzed. The handbooks are compared with Pierre Vinken and George Bruyn's Handbook of Clinical Neurology (1968-2002). This article is particularly timely in that it helps to reveal some of the origins of the disciplinary split-even at a moment when "brain psychiatry" (Wilhelm Griesinger), "neuropsychiatry" (Kurt Goldstein), and the German notion of Nervenheilkunde all acknowledged the interdisciplinary nature of both psychiatry and neurology. Particular emphasis is placed on the preeminent role that Jewish clinical neurologists assumed in the editing of the respective handbooks, leading to the extraordinary breadth and wealth of these publications. A great number of doyens in the fields of neurology and psychiatry-among them numerous Nobel Prize laureates-were involved in the dissemination of contemporary knowledge, including diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, which testifies to the fundamental status that these handbooks held for training purposes for both undergraduate and postgraduate students. Finally, the volumes analyzed in this article (between 1911 and 2002) are representative of a shift in the dominant scientific language, from German to English, since the 1930s and the 1940s, as well as the change in geographical distribution of the leading scientific authors, from Central Europe (Germany, Austria, Holland, France, Italy, and Scandinavia) to North America (the United States).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".