http://exhibits.library.stonybrook.edu/mfp/files/original/03c36dc9c7833c9ecc75b18536960e40.pdf 47752ea4463fd1d8131cd8f4c49a6ca5 PDF Text Text j- W March 14, 1992 Werner Herrmann, MD. Clinical Psychophysiology Freie Univesitat Berlin Eschenalle 3 D-1000 Berlin 13 FRG Dear Werner, First, about the IPEG Program. Turan and I met yesterday and completed the program, worked out the program printing, and made suggestions regarding the social calendar for the meeting. It looks good. With regard to the MacNeill et al report in Neuropsychobiology. I agree that you accept what you deem useful. When reviewers differ as to their recommendations, I do not think ’democracy’ is effective; the editor must make a judgement based on the merits of the paper [as he sees it] using the advice of reviewers for specific points. You ask how I proceed as editor of Convulsive Therapy. I see the role of the Editor as ’gatekeeper’and as a ’leader’. I try to determine whether an original article asserts something new, whether it is likely to be true, and whether it is likely to be ’true’ in a few years. Articles that meet these criteria and the support of reviewers are accepted with enthusiasm. Other articles are accepted if they usefully teach -- an experience that might be useful to others, or a technical point that has merit. If the report is an opinion piece -- a commentary or editorial -- I ask that it be related to something published recently, or that it makes a new argument. Finally, reviews are very helpful if they are reasonably complete (I check the citation lists myself) and if the conclusions may be helpful to the reader, whether as a student or as a researcher. The Editor is expected to stimulate and request articles that make new points. I often leave a scientific meeting with notes that lead to letters and later to editorials or reviews which I publish. The section on pharmaco-EEG in Neuropsychobiology has not made a concerted effort to improve our practice. As I recall the articles, they are mainly archival reports of studies that follow standard models. Many are not definitive, weakening our message. They have rarely been accompanied by critiques or editorials. ‘ �Werner Herrmann, MD. Page 2 The next IPEG meeting has two important issues that warrant publication. The papers of the Classification Symposium may usefully be published, perhaps as a special supplement, with a discussion of the relevance of animal models for clinical psychopharmacology. Opinions are divided between the pharmacologists who have a distinct faith that rat studies are the road to defining new psychoactive entities [after all, it is their livelihood], and the clinicians who recall that almost all that is useful in clinical psychiatry has come from clinical efforts, and that so far, no new compound or idea has come from pharmacologic studies. The PK/PD symposium exemplifies a most useful application. It deserves a separate publication, with a discussion of the BGA and FDA positions, and arguments that pharmaco-EEG studies in man have something to offer clinical medicine, something more than is offered by routine PK/PD testing when applied to psychoactive (and neurologic active) drugs. My principal argument with Kiinkel was that he appeared passive in attitude, leaving the section archival and ’no fun’ to read. Miiller-Oerlinghausen made a good point in the latest issue of Pharmacopsychiatry, when he accepted your three papers and then asked me to write a commentary. The ’package’ should have been part of the Pharmaco-EEG section of Neuropsychobiology. [Is it premature for two journals to compete for the limited pharmaco-EEG material?] As editor of the section in Neuropsychobiology, it will take much work; a good beginning can be made at the IPEG meeting where you should try to capture the best papers. My best regards. Sincerely yours, Max Fink, M.D. Professor of Psychiatry , � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Correspondence Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Correspondence to: Herrmann, Werner Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context mfp-05-00-033-1-024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1991 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource <a title="Fink, Max, 1923-" href="http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n79039548" target="_blank">Fink, Max, 1923-</a> Subject The topic of the resource Correspondence -- Correspondence Relation A related resource The Max Fink Collection Description An account of the resource Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a title="IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED" href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/" target="_blank">IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Special Collections and University Archives, University Libraries. Stony Brook University Libraries (State University of New York). Language A language of the resource en-US Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Correspondence