1906 Polk's Medical Register and Directory of North America (Texas Portion Only)

List of Physicians and Surgeons arranged by location, giving post office address with population and location, the School practiced, date and college of graduation, all the existing and extinct medical colleges in North America, with locations, officers, number of professors, lecturers, demonstrators, etc., the various medical societies, penal, reformatory and charitable state institutions, hospitals, sanitariums, dispensaries, asylums and other medical institutions, boards of health, boards of medical examiners, health officers at principal points, the laws of registration and other laws relating to the profession, medical journals with names of editors, frequency of publication and subscription rates, medical libraries, a therapeutic classification of American health resorts, mineral springs, official list of officers of the medical departments of the U.S. Army, Navy and Marine Hospital Service, the U.S. Indian Service, roster of examining surgeons of the U.S. Pension Department, a descriptive sketch of each state, territory and province, embodying such matters as location, boundary, extent in miles and acres, latitude and longitude, statistics relating to climate, temperature, rate of mortality, etc. Full particulars of all national and inter-state associations and societies relating to medicine and surgery, and an INDEX TO THE PHYSICIANS OF THE UNITED STATES. Arranged alphabetically, with the number of the page and column in which the name appears.

1902 Polk's Medical Register and Directory of the United States and Canada (Texas portion only)

List of Physicians and Surgeons arranged by states and provinces, giving post office address with population and location, the School practiced, date and college of graduation, all the existing and extinct medical colleges in the United States and Canada, with locations, officers, number of professors, lecturers, demonstrators, etc., the various medical societies, state prisons, hospitals, sanitariums, dispensaries, asylums and other medical institutions, boards of health, boards of medical examiners, a synopsis of the laws of registration and other laws relating to the profession, medical journals with names of editors, frequency of publication and subscription rates, medical libraries, mineral springs, official list of officers of the medical departments of the U.S. Army, Navy and Marine Hospital Service, roster of examining surgeons of the U.S. Pension Department, a descriptive sketch of each state, territory and province, embodying such matters as location, boundary, extent in miles and acres, latitude and longitude, statistics relating to climate, temperature, rate of mortality, number of deaths from consumption, etc. full particulars of all national associations and societies relating to medicine and surgery, and an INDEX TO THE PHYSICIANS OF THE UNITED STATES. Arranged alphabetically, with the number of the page on which the name appears.

Classification of support staff in a consortium medical library: a case study.

A representative committee of Houston Academy of Medicine-Texas Medical Center Library staff and faculty, under the direction of the library administration, successfully redesigned a job classification system for the library's nonprofessional staff. In the new system all nonprofessionals are assigned to one of five grade levels, each with a corresponding salary range. To determine its appropriate grade level each job is analyzed and assigned a numerical value using a point system based on a set of five factors, each of which is assigned a relative number of points. The factors used to measure jobs are: education and experience, complexity of work, administrative accountability, manual skill, and contact with users. Each factor is described according to degrees, so that a job can be given partial credit for a factor. An advisory staff classification committee now participates in the ongoing administration of the classification system.

Resource Guide about the Texas Medical Center for International Visitors. 2011-2012

Information and contacts for the multiple institutions in the Texas Medical Center. Created by the International Affairs Advisory Council (IAAC).

Federally regulated institutional review boards: The aspects of a "model" IRB---Is the current system in need of a tune up or complete overhaul?

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) are the primary gatekeepers for the protection of ethical standards of federally regulated research on human subjects in this country. This paper focuses on what general, broad measures that may be instituted or enhanced to exemplify a "model IRB". This is done by examining the current regulatory standards of federally regulated IRBs, not private or commercial boards, and how many of those standards have been found either inadequate or not generally understood or followed. The analysis includes suggestions on how to bring about changes in order to make the IRB process more efficient, less subject to litigation, and create standardized educational protocols for members. The paper also considers how to include better oversight for multi-center research, increased centralization of IRBs, utilization of Data Safety Monitoring Boards when necessary, payment for research protocol review, voluntary accreditation, and the institution of evaluation/quality assurance programs. ^ This is a policy study utilizing secondary analysis of publicly available data. Therefore, the research for this paper focuses on scholarly medical/legal journals, web information from the Department of Health and Human Services, Federal Drug Administration, and the Office of the Inspector General, Accreditation Programs, law review articles, and current regulations applicable to the relevant portions of the paper. ^ Two issues are found to be consistently cited by the literature as major concerns. One is a need for basic, standardized educational requirements across all IRBs and its members, and secondly, much stricter and more informed management of continuing research. There is no federally regulated formal education system currently in place for IRB members, except for certain NIH-based trials. Also, IRBs are not keeping up with research once a study has begun, and although regulated to do so, it does not appear to be a great priority. This is the area most in danger of increased litigation. Other issues such as voluntary accreditation and outcomes evaluation are slowing gaining steam as the processes are becoming more available and more sought after, such as JCAHO accrediting of hospitals. ^ Adopting the principles discussed in this paper should promote better use of a local IRBs time, money, and expertise for protecting the vulnerable population in their care. Without further improvements to the system, there is concern that private and commercial IRBs will attempt to create a monopoly on much of the clinical research in the future as they are not as heavily regulated and can therefore offer companies quicker and more convenient reviews. IRBs need to consider the advantages of charging for their unique and important services as a cost of doing business. More importantly, there must be a minimum standard of education for all IRB members in the area of the ethical standards of human research and a greater emphasis placed on the follow-up of ongoing research as this is the most critical time for study participants and may soon lead to the largest area for litigation. Additionally, there should be a centralized IRB for multi-site trials or a study website with important information affecting the trial in real time. There needs to be development of standards and metrics to assess the performance of the IRBs for quality assurance and outcome evaluations. The boards should not be content to run the business of human subjects' research without determining how well that function is actually being carried out. It is important that federally regulated IRBs provide excellence in human research and promote those values most important to the public at large.^