In 1843 in a short introduction to Ungar's translation1 of Auenbrugger's "Inventum novum," Josef Skoda in his brusque way declared that "to catalogue the reasons why Auenbrugger's discovery, which was so clearly set forth in his book was not noticed by his contemporaries would be a useless task." A study of his book, he said, showed that Auenbrugger with the fullest right might be looked on as the founder of modern diagnosis.
Yet in spite of Skoda's pronouncement of a century ago the question has since that date been taken up more than once. Two papers deserve especial notice, one by Noltenius, the other by Neuburger. In 1908 Noltenius2 published an exhaustive study of the problem of why the results of a scientific clinical investigation that had been carried on for seven years were gradually all but forgotten. In 1922 Neuburger's3 critical monograph appeared, which, based largely
HERRICK JB. A NOTE CONCERNING THE LONG NEGLECT OF AUENBRUGGER'S "INVENTUM NOVUM". Arch Intern Med (Chic). 1943;71(6):741–748. doi:10.1001/archinte.1943.00210060002001
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: