Studying for Behavioral Neurology/Neuropsychiatry boards

[FrasierMD]

For the BN&NP UCNS boards, what resources have others found most helpful for studying and preparing? Thanks in advance!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[RenegadeSynapse]

I read through most of the BNNP textbook edited by Arciniegas, Anderson, and Filley throughout the fellowship, and then I think the continuum's on BNNP and dementia were helpful. I also read over some select other stuff (e.g. the anatomy chapter from Mesulam's text).

I took the exam in 2017 and did well with the above. I thought it was a bit heavier on the dementia-related stuff than neuropsychiatry per se.

 

[neglect]

Serious question: why do this?

 

[RenegadeSynapse]

Serious question: why do this?

I'm an academic behavioral neurologist affiliated with an ADRC, so there's a very real benefit to having the UCNS-certification for me. If you plan on being in those circles, it's beneficial. If you're in private practice, I can't imagine anyone really cares about it. A friend got his, but seriously considered not. I think the practice he was joining liked being able to say they have a "certified" specialist in something. But the added benefit for him is probably negligible to non-existent.

 

[neglect]

I'm an academic behavioral neurologist affiliated with an ADRC, so there's a very real benefit to having the UCNS-certification for me. If you plan on being in those circles, it's beneficial. If you're in private practice, I can't imagine anyone really cares about it. A friend got his, but seriously considered not. I think the practice he was joining liked being able to say they have a "certified" specialist in something. But the added benefit for him is probably negligible to non-existent.

Can I just mention that I hate the new format? I thought I was on this thread, but somehow ended up commenting on your public page.

I have to say that your attitude causes me distress. Is this REALLY beneficial - to your salary? Or is it an extraneous diploma that's given out to you after you've already trained perfectly well at premier places? Patients don't care and it won't benefit them. Meanwhile, you've just handed over money to a parasitic organization that in turn "tests" you (but you're already properly trained, so you already should know the canon of behavioral neurology that they're forced to test you on - did amyloid oligomers come up?), then gives you some validation. Do you need this? Or are you hurting those who are skilled but don't have the certification?

Doctors need to jump through these rings. That's what got us as far as we are. But there comes a time when you reach expertise and beyond, and there is no more training, no more laurels other than monetary, satisfaction from the job, advancing medicine and I guess the Potemkin prize. Are these boards doing anything for you? Your money, satisfaction, or advancing medicine?

Anyway, those are my thought about our ABPN boards: parasites.

 

[FrasierMD]

I read through most of the BNNP textbook edited by Arciniegas, Anderson, and Filley throughout the fellowship, and then I think the continuum's on BNNP and dementia were helpful. I also read over some select other stuff (e.g. the anatomy chapter from Mesulam's text).

I took the exam in 2017 and did well with the above. I thought it was a bit heavier on the dementia-related stuff than neuropsychiatry per se.

Thanks for the advice! Any question databases you found most helpful?

 

[RenegadeSynapse]

Can I just mention that I hate the new format? I thought I was on this thread, but somehow ended up commenting on your public page.

I have to say that your attitude causes me distress. Is this REALLY beneficial - to your salary? Or is it an extraneous diploma that's given out to you after you've already trained perfectly well at premier places? Patients don't care and it won't benefit them. Meanwhile, you've just handed over money to a parasitic organization that in turn "tests" you (but you're already properly trained, so you already should know the canon of behavioral neurology that they're forced to test you on - did amyloid oligomers come up?), then gives you some validation. Do you need this? Or are you hurting those who are skilled but don't have the certification?

Doctors need to jump through these rings. That's what got us as far as we are. But there comes a time when you reach expertise and beyond, and there is no more training, no more laurels other than monetary, satisfaction from the job, advancing medicine and I guess the Potemkin prize. Are these boards doing anything for you? Your money, satisfaction, or advancing medicine?

Anyway, those are my thought about our ABPN boards: parasites.

Agreed re: the format, it's pretty terrible.

Well, from a practical stand point, it seems to be attractive to potential employers / centers who are looking to hire neurobehavioral specialists. The job I took specifically inquired about whether I was or would be UCNS certified, and it seemed to matter. So for me, personally, with my proximal goal of obtaining the type of job I wanted (academic behavioral neurology, subspecialty only clinic practice, ADRC, protected time for developing K23), it helped. Whether it should or shouldn't or whether it's harmful to the field as a whole, I'm more agnostic on. Your point could be applied to every subspecialty and gets to the core of arguments between general neurology and ever-subspecializing trends. Movement thus far has gone the way opposite of BNNP and have not went with a boarding organization and they seem to be doing just fine.

I've been pushing towards BNNP as a subspecialty for a long time, and for me there's a sense of satisfaction for making it and learning a fairly deep cannon of knowledge across both neurologic and psychiatric disorders (perhaps speaking more to my fragile ego needing yet another pat on the head after training for so long than anything else, lol). I've told a lot of folks it's the only certification I can get as a neurologist that damn-near guarantees a salary reduction. I'd make more as a general neurologist without the fellowship, I suspect.

Ultimately, I dunno. You may be right. But I didn't feel like I was in any position to buck the system.

Somewhat related to the certification question: I think my fellowship training was very important for my foundational knowledge in the field, and do that that most folks coming out of a neurologic residency at present who want to be behavioral neurologists probably need that year to really get that base.

The year is more of a financial burden than the test, and that part I DO think is important. I care far more about someones training that the piece of paper on their wall. There are exceptions, YMMV, etc.

 

[RenegadeSynapse]

Thanks for the advice! Any question databases you found most helpful?

There's nothing like UWorld or Beat the Boards for the BNNP exam, but I don't think most folks really need it.

The questions associated with the continuum issues are helpful, probably 100 or so of them if you combine the last two issues of dementia and BNNP.

I think I looked over some of the neurobehavior questions from the Cheng Cheng general neurology boards book, not sure if that helped very much.

 

[neglect]

Agreed re: the format, it's pretty terrible.

Well, from a practical stand point, it seems to be attractive to potential employers / centers who are looking to hire neurobehavioral specialists. The job I took specifically inquired about whether I was or would be UCNS certified, and it seemed to matter. So for me, personally, with my proximal goal of obtaining the type of job I wanted (academic behavioral neurology, subspecialty only clinic practice, ADRC, protected time for developing K23), it helped. Whether it should or shouldn't or whether it's harmful to the field as a whole, I'm more agnostic on. Your point could be applied to every subspecialty and gets to the core of arguments between general neurology and ever-subspecializing trends. Movement thus far has gone the way opposite of BNNP and have not went with a boarding organization and they seem to be doing just fine.

I've been pushing towards BNNP as a subspecialty for a long time, and for me there's a sense of satisfaction for making it and learning a fairly deep cannon of knowledge across both neurologic and psychiatric disorders (perhaps speaking more to my fragile ego needing yet another pat on the head after training for so long than anything else, lol). I've told a lot of folks it's the only certification I can get as a neurologist that damn-near guarantees a salary reduction. I'd make more as a general neurologist without the fellowship, I suspect.

Ultimately, I dunno. You may be right. But I didn't feel like I was in any position to buck the system.

Somewhat related to the certification question: I think my fellowship training was very important for my foundational knowledge in the field, and do that that most folks coming out of a neurologic residency at present who want to be behavioral neurologists probably need that year to really get that base.

The year is more of a financial burden than the test, and that part I DO think is important. I care far more about someones training that the piece of paper on their wall. There are exceptions, YMMV, etc.

I guess I'm old enough to be considered grandfathered in, which gives me what the kids call privilege to not give a damn. If you do trials, doing "behavioral" leads to a very drastic increase in payment. But only if you do them well, and ignore the academic thing.

Also, it is true that I don't like the sub, sub specialization of neurology. The n-vasc folks won't deal with PD. The epilepsy folks won't even tell someone they had a stroke. It is getting crazy.

 

[reca]

Bumping this thread, any new resources for studying for the BNNP boards? Taking the test this year and feel wholly underprepared. I’m considering pushing it but the test is only offered every other year and by then, I’ll be two and a half years out of training.