I'm feeling torn between the two specialties. I've had gero prac experience (with some neuro assessment) and will continue during internship. I'm looking at two different kinds of fellowship (all VA's): neuro with a good amount of time spent in geriatric assessment or gero with a good amount of time spent in neuro assessment. I would like to continue assessing older adults with cognitive complaints and spend some time in consultation/ intervention (I would be fine if this was minimal but would like some). Which is more practical career wise? Will neuro assessment experience limited to older adults pose a problem for neuro postdocs?
gero or neuro?
- Thread starter NeuroLady
- Start date
Sanman
O.G.
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2000
- Messages
- 5,460
- Reaction score
- 8,245
That is a personal choice. However, a geropsych perso, I would suggest neuro fellowship as it is easier to move into gero jobs with a neuro background than the other way as neuro is much more standardized. I don't believe that this will change soon.
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,827
- Reaction score
- 5,609
Would think that, in reality, it would be dictated by what you actually want to do with this population? Assessment and feedback and treatment rec? Or work with them ongoing? Most (not all) formally trained neuropsychologists, whether inpatient or outpatient, will be set up in/for a predominately C/L consultation model, rather than treatment model. Rehab psychologists seem to bridge this gap to some degree so far as I see.
For example, the HBPC psychologists at my VA are largely geropsychs with the obvious necessary training in cognitive assessment for purpose of treatment planning. Not so much for pure differntial dx or dealing with complicated cases.
Last edited:
A neuro focus is probably the best choice, for the same reason @Sanman cites, particularly if you're ok with intervention as secondary. I agree with @erg923 in theory, but there are neuropsychologists like us who enjoy intervention and ongoing work-- more rehab slanted, if you will-- so this identity crisis is not uncommon. Primarily geriatric neuro assessment will not be a disadvantage when it comes to neuro post-docs, as many fellowships are focused on this population; indeed, it's the largest neuro sub-specialty area. As with anything else, just make sure you are applying to the right positions.
D
deleted343839
If you are interested primarily in assessment and consultation, I'd go with neuro. This will not present much of an obstacle to learning the intervention side of things, IMO, whereas the reverse situation is not true.
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2010
- Messages
- 9,314
- Reaction score
- 5,570
I'd also agree with Sanman. It'll likely be easier to focus on neuropsych and integrate additional treatment experiences, than to focus heavily on geropsych while trying to meet neuropsych training criteria.
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2011
- Messages
- 2,316
- Reaction score
- 3,873
No that I should be an example for anyone 
, but i focused on gero in graduate school (practicum and research), and now work almost exclusively doing assessments with toddlers. The decisions you make early in your training are important and can make things easier down the road, but they don't necessarily rule out your taking a different path in the future. In your case, however, I do think some of the previous posters make a valid point- as neurospsych training occurs in the context of more general clinical training, that route is more likely to lead to an ability to do neuro and gero (vs. a pure gero track with no neuro training).
, but i focused on gero in graduate school (practicum and research), and now work almost exclusively doing assessments with toddlers. The decisions you make early in your training are important and can make things easier down the road, but they don't necessarily rule out your taking a different path in the future. In your case, however, I do think some of the previous posters make a valid point- as neurospsych training occurs in the context of more general clinical training, that route is more likely to lead to an ability to do neuro and gero (vs. a pure gero track with no neuro training).
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2005
- Messages
- 5,128
- Reaction score
- 8,181
It's easy to get training in X while you're in training. It's hard to impossible to go back.
IME: Getting neuro training from grad school and directly transitioning into a post doc is "easier". Getting retrained in any of the ABPPs is significantly easier from neuro than the other way around. Once you have HCG training, there is no mandate that you practice neuropsychology. You could practice as a generalist, or retrain into anything. But your earning potential throughout your career would he higher if you had the HCG training. And you could go back any time. In grad school, neuro had a more even split in age populations. In practice, the majority of adult neuro is gero.
IME: Getting neuro training from grad school and directly transitioning into a post doc is "easier". Getting retrained in any of the ABPPs is significantly easier from neuro than the other way around. Once you have HCG training, there is no mandate that you practice neuropsychology. You could practice as a generalist, or retrain into anything. But your earning potential throughout your career would he higher if you had the HCG training. And you could go back any time. In grad school, neuro had a more even split in age populations. In practice, the majority of adult neuro is gero.
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 22,380
- Reaction score
- 4,314
With Bany Boomers aging, gero is a great spot to be for Neuro ppl. It isn't my preference, but I'm in the minority.
I agree with most of the posters...go neuro if you can, and then focus on gero bc the other way around will be swimming upstream.
