The Movement Disorder Society and Movement Disorders:A Modern History
Christopher G. Goetz, MD1* and Anne McGhiey, CAE2
1Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA2Executive Director, Movement Disorder Society, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
ABSTRACT: The Movement Disorder Society(MDS) developed out of a merger with two short-livedorganizations, the Movement Disorder Society, primar-ily organized to develop a journal for the subspecialty,and the International Society of Motor Disturbances,primarily organized to develop international con-gresses. The formal merger of the Movement DisorderSociety and the International Society of Motor Distur-bances into the Movement Disorder Society took placeat the 2nd International Congress of Movement Disor-ders in Munich, Germany, in June 1992. Whereas thejournal, Movement Disorders, and the annual Interna-tional Congress of Parkinsons Disease and Movement
Disorders remain the anchors of the society, the goalsnow include the development of regional symposia, re-gional sections, Web-based educational programs, andoutreach efforts to include young investigators, wideinternational membership, and inclusion of non-neurol-ogists, including basic scientists, neurosurgeons, andnonphysician health professionals. Movement Disor-ders has a continuingly growing subscribership andrising impact factor. VC 2011 Movement Disorder Society
Key Words: Movement Disorder Society; MDS; Move-ment Disorders; movement disorders; neurological history
Introduction: Movement DisordersAnd Neurological Societies Prior to
Whereas the 19th century can be viewed historicallyas the century that established neurology as a specialtyin medicine, the 20th century, specically the secondhalf, marked the evolution of movement disorders as adistinct neurological domain. The World Federation ofNeurology (WFN), founded in 1957 under the impetusof Ludwig van Bogaert, MacDonald Critchley, Perce-vil Bailey, and other world leaders, gathered neurolo-
gists together to form an international body ofneurological focus. Even in its early years, however,the WFN fostered special interest groups, termedResearch Commissions. The rst of these bodies con-cerned Geographical Neurology, Statistics andEpidemiology (1959), and Neurochemistry (1959),but thereafter other groups formed. In this process,subspecialty groups evolved into Research Groups,including one devoted to extrapyramidal disorders,organized by Melvin Yahr in 195960, and one onHuntingtons disease, founded a few years later byAndre Barbeau. Membership to these groups involvedan application submitted to the ofcers of the exist-ing group, which voted on admission. Although thesize of these bodies was small, occasionally largersymposia were sponsored that allowed largerparticipation.1
At the American Academy of Neurology (AAN),the concept of sections was developed in 1980, andthe Section of Neuropharmacology was the secondsection to be formed.2 Organized largely under thedirectorship of Thomas Chase, this group allied clini-cians, researchers, and industry representatives withshared interests in clinical neuropharmacologicalissues largely linked to movement disorders. This
------------------------------------------------------------*Correspondence to: Dr. Christopher G. Goetz, Rush University MedicalCenter, Suite 755; 1725 W. Harrison Street, Chicago, IL 60612, USA;firstname.lastname@example.org
Relevant conicts of interest/nancial disclosures: Christopher G.Goetz received a stipend from MDS as Co-Editor-in-Chief of MovementDisorders from 2004 to 2010. Anne McGhiey is a full-time employee ofExecutive Director Inc., which has the management contract with MDS.Full nancial disclosures and author roles may be found in the onlineversion of this article.
Received: 15 October 2010; Revised: 17 January 2011; Accepted: 24January 2011Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com).DOI: 10.1002/mds.23689
R E V I E W
Movement Disorders, Vol. 26, No. 6, 2011 939
group was replaced by the AAN Section of Move-ment Disorders, which developed in 1995.
MODIS and ISMD
The Movement Disorder Society (MDS) developed asa merger of two short-lived organizations, the Move-ment Disorder Society (MODIS) and the InternationalMedical Society of Motor Disturbances (ISMD). In themid-1980s, Stanley Fahn suggested that a society de-velop with the primary aim of publishing a subspecialtyjournal. In a 2000 interview, he recounted these rstconsiderations that emerged out of his friendship withC. David Marsden and his teaching experiences at inter-national meetings, especially the AAN, where video ma-terial was a pivotal teaching medium3:
. . . [T]he idea came that we needed a journal. And Isuggested to C. David Marsden, if we were going to havea journal, instead of having a publisher or a publishingcompany own the journal and get all the prots, and weas editors just do all the work, we ought to found a soci-ety. And would he join me in organizing a society, sincehe was a leading European movement disorders expert atthat time? So I decided if he knows all the European neu-rologists and I knew a lot of the American ones, maybe,together, we could jointly found this society. So we calledit the Movement Disorders Society (p. 49).3
His interview continued with further recollections:
We developed a questionnaire at the time of an inter-
national Parkinsons Symposium that was held in New
York City in 1985.. . .and I asked people if they would be
willing to join, would they be willing to pay dues. The
purpose would be to have a journal. And it was over-
whelmingpeople responded in favor of that, so we
decided for the World Congress of Neurology in Ham-
burg, Germany, to be held in September of 85, to hold a
little meeting. I invited a few besides David and
myself. . .to join us in my hotel room one evening as sort
of the founders of this new society: Joe Jankovic and Ira
Shoulson, who were the Americans, and Andrew Lees
from London and Eduardo Tolosa from Barcelona, who
were the other two Europeans.. . .Now, it turned out, Ira
couldnt come that night. And he joined subsequently. So
the ve of us were there and we decided formally to do
this. We decided to hold a little organizational meeting
the next day with people we respected. . .to discuss it and
form a steering committee; I was appointed as the presi-
dent or chairman of the steering committee. I was asked
to negotiate with the publisher and get the thing started
(p. 49; see Fig. 1).3
Simultaneously, in 1985 at the same Hamburg meet-ing, Reiner Benecke gathered several colleagues to dis-cuss the formation of a society primarily focused onthe organization of international movement disordercongresses. The formation of the International Societyof Motor Disturbances was described as follows in theISMD Newsletter No. 1, Autumn 1987:
The idea of founding ISMD sprang from the close sci-
entic collaboration between the Abteilung fur Klinische
Neurophysiologie, Gottingen and the Department of
Neurology, London. An underlying aim of the close sci-
entic cooperation between these two centers was to cre-
ate a synthesis between pathophysiological mechanisms,
which are detected primarily with neurophysiological
methods, clinical symptoms, and various therapeutic
approaches.. . .The founders of the ISMD were in agree-
ment that the main objective of the society should be to
bring together clinicians and scientists within the frame-
work of international congresses.. . .One conclusion
drawn from the rst congress was that combining a sci-
entic paper with vivid videotape presentations is
extremely effective (p. 1).4
As is clear from the reference to Department ofNeurology, London, C. David Marsden was also amember of this organizing team. In a 2006 interviewfor the Movement Disorders Archives, Mark Hallett,an early member of both new societies, recalled nd-ing yers announcing two different societies. At areception, he encountered Fahn and Marsden together:
I addressed my point to David. I said, David, what is
that about two different societies? And Stan Fahn said,
Two societies? And David said, Oh, yes Stan, I was
meaning to tell you about that (p. 1).5
The two societies carefully sculpted their missions inan overtly noncompetitive and supportive manner: theMODIS developed a society-owned video-based jour-nal, had a largely clinical research focus, and, althoughinternational, drew its largest membership from NorthAmerica; the ISMD developed international congresses,
FIG. 1. Group photo from Hamburg meeting to establish the MODIS,1985. From left: Eduardo Toloso, Stanley Fahn, Andrew Lees, JosephJankovic, C.D. Marsden. All of these leaders have served as presidentof the MDS (Table 2).
G O E T Z A N D M C G H I E Y
940 Movement Disorders, Vol. 26, No. 6, 2011
had a strong physiological anchor, and drew its primarymembership from Europe.The leadership of the two organizations recognized
an overall goal of international representation for both.The ISMDs presidents were European or North Ameri-can and served 2-year terms (Table 1). The MODIS wasrun by a steering committee composed of North Ameri-can and European leaders and chaired by Stanley Fahn.In 1988, MODIS held its rst Executive Committeemeeting with Stanley Fahn representing the MODISSteering Committee.6 The rst MODIS elections forpresident were held in 1991, and Stanley Fahn waselected to assume the post of the societys ofcial rstpresident with C. David Marsden elected simultane-ously to become the president-elect (Table 1).7
The MODIS reached its primary aim of developinga journal, and the rst issue of Movement Disordersappeared in 1986 (see below). The rst organizedISMD congress was held in Lausanne, Switzerland, inJune 1986, with a resultant published selection of keyarticles.8 With a planned format of biannual con-gresses, a second meeting in 1988 took place in Romewith a similar summary publication.9
The overlapping membership and success of boththe journal and the international meetings rapidly ledto the consideration of a merger of the two societies.As a test of the concept, the rst initiative was ajointly sponsored meeting that took place in 1990 inWashington, DC, as the First International Congressof Movement Disorders. Within the congress setting, acombined ISMD/MODIS business meeting occurredwhere members discussed a proposal to merge.10 Asecond jointly sponsored congress followed in 1992 asfurther merger discussions continued. Finally, on Feb-ruary 8, 1992, in a 12-hour meeting, the two mergergroups met in London. The session was chaired by C.David Marsden, with Stanley Fahn, Joseph Jankovic,
Anthony Lang, and Andrew Lees ofcially represent-ing MODIS and Alfredo Berardelli, Reiner Benecke,Bastian Conrad, and Mark Hallett ofcially represent-ing ISMD. Mark Hallett recalled the meeting:
Everyone believed that he [C. David Marsden] had his
heart in the right place in terms of putting the two soci-
eties together, so he was the chair of it, and then others
of us were there representing one or the other society in
this regard.. . .Thinking about who was there, its hard to
remember who was on what side, because there was a
lot of overlap in terms of membership (p. 7).5
The group came to an agreement and drafted a re-vised constitution and bylaws for approval by both theISMD and MODIS memberships. For MODIS, 493members (69%) responded to the vote, and 491 were infavor of accepting the proposed constitutional amend-ments that would permit a merger to go forward.Within the ISMD, 113 members (51%) responded, and110 were in favor of accepting the proposed merger.11
Financial equality helped the merger, as the twosocieties came to the negotiations with relatively equalbank accounts (ISMD $112,896 and MODIS$167,221).10 One of the knotty points concerned thename of the new society. Hallett recalled:
So a lot of discussion transpired about what the name
of the society should be. Stan Fahn, who was. . .the foun-
der of MODIS, advocated very strongly to maintain the
name Movement Disorder Society, and it was really a
sensible thing to do. However, there was a lot of objec-
tion to that from the ISMD side, because it sounded like
it might seem like the old society was continuing. And so
thats where the abbreviation changed, so to make it
clear that this was not the same Movement Disorder So-
ciety as the old one. It was considered inappropriate to
TABLE 1. Leadership of the MODIS and ISMD prior to their merger and the formation of the MDS
MODIS ISMD president Congress
1985 Steering committee chaired by Stanley Fahn C. David Marsden1986 C. David Marsden Lausanne, Switzerland (ISMD), June 1921, 19861987 Mario Manfredi1988 Mario Manfredi Rome, Italy (ISMD), June 24, 19881989 Mark Hallett1990 Mark Hallett Washington, DC, USA (MODIS/ISMD)1st International
Congress of Movement Disorders, April 2527, 19901991 Stanley Fahn: rst MODIS president starting
Aug. 1991Bastian Conrad
1992 Merger to MDS: leadership shifted to MDS(see Table 2)
Bastian Conrad See Table 2 for MDS Congresses1993 C.W. Olanow1994 C.W. Olanow: nal details of merger
concluded and full leadership shiftedto MDS
With the merger of MODIS and ISMD in 1992 to form MDS, overall leadership shifted to MDS (see Table 2). The ISMD remained as a scal entity until 1994,with B. Conrad serving as president in 1992 and C.W. Olanow serving as the nal ISMD president in 199394 and rst treasurer of MDS to coordinate thecomplicated scal issues of bringing one tax-free organizations into a single entity.
H I S T O R Y O F M D S A N D M O V E M E N T D I S O R D E R S
Movement Disorders, Vol. 26, No. 6, 2011 941
continue to call it MODIS, and it should be called MDS
instead (p. 8).5
The MODIS had never had a logo, so one additionalnegotiation involved the ofcial adoption of the ISMDlogo as the new MDS logo, thereby allowing a visualsymbol of continuity for the ISMD to balance theMovement Disorder Society retention for the MODIS.The logo was an original artistic contribution by Mrs.Reiner Benecke.5
The Movement Disorder Society asa Merged International Organization
The formal merger of the MODIS and ISMD intothe Movement Disorder Society (MDS) took place atthe 2nd International Congress of Movement Disor-ders in Munich, Germany in June, 1992.11 The rstpresident of the combined society was C. David Mars-den, and the rst treasurer, in charge of resolving thecomplicated nances of the merger, was C.W. Olanow(see Table 2).12 The 1st Congress of the MovementDisorder Society as a single body took place in Or-lando, Florida, in November 1994. At the end of thatyear, with the nal nancial details of the mergerresolved, the ISMD dissolved as a separate body.One of the many long-lasting contributions of C.
David Marsden was his leadership in developing thebylaws and constitution of the MDS and ensuringclear denitions of the leadership responsibilities. Thisframework served as the architectural foundation of
the society. The MDS ofcers include seven leaders:president, secretary, treasurer, past president, presi-dent-elect, secretary-elect, and treasurer-elect. Thisbody is purposefully constructed to ensure continuityof leadership, with each person serving the given ofcefor two years and then rotating up for the ofcers-elect and current president and rotating off for thecurrent treasurer and secretary and past president. Anominating committee develops a slate for all theseposts that is circulated to the membership for addedcandidates, and then the MDS membership votes toelect all ofcers. The ofcers use the International Ex-ecutive Committee (10 members) for counsel. Bylawsare available on the MDS Web site and published inthe membership directory.13
The MDS mission is an international one, and mem-bership is encouraged worldwide. As of December2010, there were 3,537 MDS members. The numberof members at the time of the MDS founding was539,14 and the number of members has increasedsteadily since. Given its international scope, the MDShas concentrated equally on developing programs thatt the needs of given geographical regions, and thismission has led to the development of the EuropeanSection, founded in 1999,15 the Asian & OceanianSection, founded in 2005,16 and the Pan AmericanSection, founded in 2008.17 The concept of regionalsections was originally introduced by the ISMD tofoster the development of local symposia, and this tra-dition has been fully incorporated into the MDS con-cept of these regional sections. They are ofcialbodies of the MDS, but with a regional mission to
TABLE 2. MDS leadership and congresses
Year President Congress
1992 C. David Marsden Munich, GE (MODIS/ISMD)2nd International Congress of Movement Disorders, June 2426, 19921993 C. David Marsden1994 C. David Marsden Orlando, FL, USA (MDS)3rd International Congress of Movement Disorders, November 712, 19941995 Joseph Jankovic1996 Joseph Jankovic Vienna, Austria (MDS)4th International Congress of Movement Disorders, June 1621,19961997 Eduardo Tolosa1998 Eduardo Tolosa New York, NY, USA (MDS)5th International Congress of Parkinsons Disease and Movement Disorders, October 1014, 19981999 Mark Hallett2000 Mark Hallett Barcelona, Spain (MDS)6th International Congress of Parkinsons Disease and Movement Disorders, June 1115, 20002001 Werner Poewe2002 Werner Poewe Miami, FL, USA (MDS)7th International Congress of Parkinsons Disease and Movement Disorders, November 10)14, 20022003 C. Warren Olanow2004 C. Warren Olanow Rome, Italy (MDS)8th International Congress Parkinsons Disease and Movement Disorders, June 1317, 20042005 Andrew Lees New Orleans, LA, USA (MDS)9th International Congress Parkinsons Disease and Movement Disorders, March 58, 20052006 Andrew Lees Kyoto, Japan (MDS)10th International Congress Parkinsons Disease and Movement Disorders, October 28November 2, 20062007 Anthony Lang Istanbul, Turkey (MDS)11th International Congress Parkinsons Disease and Movement Disorders, June 37, 20072008 Anthony Lang Chicago, IL, USA (MDS)12th International Congress Parkinsons Disease and Movement Disorders, June 2226, 20082009 Philip Thompsona Paris, France (MDS)13th International Congress Parkinsons Disease and Movement Disorders, June 711, 20092010 Philip Thompson Buenos Aires, Argentina (MDS)14th International Congress Parkinsons Disease and Movement Disorders, June 1317, 20102011 Guenther Deuschla Toronto, Ontario, Canada (MDS)15th International Congress of Parkinsons Disease and Movement Disorders, June 59, 2011
aThe MDS bylaws changed the term of presidency to coincide with the annual congress, and therefore P. Thompson started his term in June 2009 with A.E.Lang remaining in the leadership position from January to June 2009. Likewise, G. Deuschl will assume the presidency in June 2011, with P. Thompsonserving in this role from January to June 2011.
G O E T Z A N D M C G H I E Y
942 Movement Disorders, Vol. 26, No. 6, 2011
address movement disorder issues pertinent to a givengeographical region and to foster the regional pres-ence of the MDS as an international body.Allied to this concept of addressing regional needs
within a global organization, the MDS began initiatingother regional outreach programs in 1999 with theestablishment of its afliate member program.18 In2001, it developed a visiting professorship program,19
and since the programs inception, awards have beenprovided to support the several regions, includingRomania, South Africa, Tunisia, India, China, Chile,Armenia, and Thailand. Other outreach programshave focused on MDS membership and attendance atthe congress by a broad range of professions. WhereasMDS draws its membership primarily from clinicalneurologists and basic scientists working in the area ofbasal ganglia research, outreach programs haveincreasingly focused on attracting members from otherprofessions, including neurosurgeons, neurologicalnurses, and nonphysician health professionals.From the societys inception, leadership roles
involving members outside the ofcers and Interna-tional Executive Committee has been prioritized.Task forces that address a specic issue of importanceto the society are organized at the request of the pres-ident, and examples have included task forces onRating Scales for Parkinsons Disease, ParkinsonsDisease Dementia, Epidemiology, and Neurosurgeryin Movement Disorders. These bodies organize them-selves around a specic task and are continued in anongoing manner as new charges are added or are dis-solved once the program is completed. Committeescontrast with task forces in having an ongoing chargewithin the administrative organization of the MDS,and whereas leadership rotates over time, the commit-tees remain active on a continual basis to address pri-mary roles of the MDS: Archives, Awards, Bylaws,Congress Scientic Program, Continuing MedicalEducation, Education, Financial Affairs, IndustrialRelations, Liaison/Public Relations, Membership,Nominations, Publication Oversight, Scientic Issues,and Web Oversight.In 2008, ofcial Web site editors were selected to
guide the enhanced development of an active MDSWeb site. Under the guidance of editors Hubert Fer-nandez and Marcelo Merello, the site has educationalmaterials, a case of the month, interactive resources,and links to Movement Disorders. Rating scales canbe accessed and downloaded as well as seminalarticles pertinent to the eld. In 2010, a training pro-gram for the newly developed MDS-sponsored revi-sion of the Unied Parkinsons Disease Rating Scale(MDS-UPDRS) was launched, so that members can betrained on the new scale and take a self-assessmenttest online with immediate feedback and certicate onsuccessful completion.20
Movement Disorders was originally organized tohave two editors-in-chief, one representing the Westernhemisphere and the other the Eastern hemisphere. Thisconcept has been honored through the four pairs ofeditors in the journals history (Table 3). The journal isthe major voice piece of MDS, and an annual subscrip-tion is an automatic benet of MDS membership.Under the leadership of Stanley Fahn and C. David
Marsden, the original journal appeared six timesannually and was a small format in terms of page sizeand page numbers. To start the journal, the rstarticles were recruited by the editors themselves.Christopher Goetz recalls:
I was standing by my poster presentation at a meeting,
and Stan Fahn approached me in his usual supportive
manner, asking me about my study and engaging me as a
young investigator. He then shared with me his vision of
the journal and asked if I would submit an article imme-
diately for peer review and potential publication. As a
junior member of the movement disorder community, I
was so stunned to be invited to submit an article that I
took my poster home, revamped it into a manuscript,
and submitted it to Stan within a week. One of my most
cherished career accomplishments is to have been an
author in Vol. 1, Number 1 of Movement Disorders
(Christopher Goetz, unpublished).
Movement Disorders was a particularly innovativepublishing effort because it was owned by the MDSitself, and it included a video accompaniment. Authorsreporting on clinical material included video documen-tation of the movement disorders discussed, their evolu-tion over time, and their responses to new therapies. Inthe beginning years, one tape was distributed to all sub-scribers at the end of the year to cover material in thearticles published in that year. While still under theleadership of the rst editors, Movement Disordersmoved to a larger-format (81=2 11) journal in 1990with Volume 5 to expand editorial space and to reducethe backlog of manuscripts.21 Twice-yearly distributionof video supplements began in 1994 to accommodatethe increasing volume of visual material related to thepublished articles. In the 10 years of the FahnMarsdenleadership, the number of articles published annually inMovement Disorders increased from 36 to 146.During the leadership of Anthony Lang and Andrew
Lees (19962003), the journal introduced Video Edu-cational Supplements, for example, Tremor: BasicMechanisms and Clinical Aspects, managed byGuenther Deuschl (1998). In 2001, the video formatchanged to DVDs that contained both the video mate-rials and accompanying articles on the disk. The jour-nals success led to monthly distribution in 2003.
H I S T O R Y O F M D S A N D M O V E M E N T D I S O R D E R S
Movement Disorders, Vol. 26, No. 6, 2011 943
Other important innovations during the LangLeeseditorship included a new emphasis on articles of widereadership interest, including Editorials, Reviews,Controversies, and Viewpoints. Allied to this effort,they designated two new posts, subeditors for ClinicalReviews and Basic Science Reviews. The editors tookthe initiative to recruit video submissions of animalmodels being used in movement disorder research, sothat clinicians would have a better context for evaluat-ing data from basic science reports. Administratively,they developed a new Historical Section that encour-aged publications on the origins of movement disor-ders and the key gures behind the diseasedescriptions and scientic advances. These successfulefforts increased readership subscriptions, and thejournals impact factor rose above 3.0 by 2004 (seeFig. 2). Annual published articles increased nearlytwofold during this tenure, from 148 in 1996 to 284in 2003.An important additional innovation during the
LangLees leadership was the launching of a Web sitefor Movement Disorders. The journal Web site wasestablished for the rst time on Wiley InterSciencewhen Wiley acquired Movement Disorders from Lip-pincott, Williams & Wilkins in January 2001. At thattime, it was still rare in the industry to have scholarlyjournal content available online, but this movementrapidly expanded, and Wiley made Movement Disor-ders available online in 2001. In this initial launch,the content included articles in full-text HTML and
PDF format. Once nal copyediting and proofs ofaccepted articles were approved by authors, they wereuploaded to the Web site ahead of print in the Early-View feature. The home page itself included basic in-formation such as author guidelines and editorialboard and society information. At this time, the videomaterial related to the articles was not available onthe Web site. In 2003, Wiley InterScience redesignedits electronic platforms and modernized the journalsWeb site further, so that as the next set of editorstook over leadership, the journal was prepared to beadministratively managed exclusively through a cen-tral Web site.The third set of journal editors, Christopher Goetz
and Guenther Deuschl (20042009), further expandedthe journal to 16 annual issues and introduced an arti-cle for Continuing Medical Education in each issue.They developed the policy of allowing supplementalmaterials (additional tables, further analyses of interestbut not central to the core publication) to be added tothe Web site edition of articles. Guidelines to preventghostwriting, to document nancial disclosure, and toclarify issues of perceived or real bias were incorpo-rated into the journal at all levels. Online publication,a more rapid review time, and the initiation of Expe-dited Publications facilitated more timely delivery ofnew information. The traditional red-and-white coverwas changed to a full-color format in 2008. Their ten-ure marked the full conversion of the journal to elec-tronic management, will all articles processed fromsubmission to review to nal disposition on the Inter-net: (http://www.movementdisorders.org/publications/journal). Administratively, they relegated most casehistories and small observations to Letters. In a timeframe when other journals had increasingly turned tointernal triage before selecting articles to be consideredfor peer review, the editors maintained the establishedtradition of Movement Disorders as a full peer-review
TABLE 3. Editors of Movement Disorders
Western hemisphere Eastern hemisphere
19861995 Stanley Fahn C. David Marsden19962003 Anthony E. Lang Andrew Lees20042009 Christopher G. Goetz Guenther Deuschl2010present C. Warren Olanow Jose Obeso
FIG. 2. Impact factor for Movement Disorders.
G O E T Z A N D M C G H I E Y
944 Movement Disorders, Vol. 26, No. 6, 2011
journal. Likewise, Supplements covering special topicsbecame a universally peer-reviewed component of thejournal. At the time of their retirement, the impactfactor for the journal reached its highest peak in2009, surpassing 4.0 (2010 gures pending). In 2009,1261 manuscripts were submitted for review from 55countries, and 489 articles were published.In 2010, the leadership baton passed to C.W. Ola-
now and Jose Obeso as chief editors. Under theirdirection, the journal has been revised with a newcover format, color pages and graphs, and a higherlevel of editing and graphics. The journal is now pub-lished monthly, with the addition of two special themeissues each year devoted to a single topic. They haveintroduced a greater focus on clinical trials and trans-lational research and a Hot Topics section to coverimportant articles dealing with movement disordersfrom other journals. Clinical phenomenology has beenretained as an important journal focus with prioritiza-tion on cases providing novel insights, unique clinicalphenomena, or an important educational lesson. Aninteraction with the MDS Web site has been arranged,whereby interesting but not unique cases can be pub-lished online, with a brief summary recorded in thejournal. Importantly, with advances in technology, allvideos are now submitted electronically. This innova-tion permits videos to be published on the journalWeb site concurrently with the publication of the arti-cle, allowing readers to access the video material atthe same time they read the article.The editorial process was also been modied, with a
centralized editorial ofce to handle all papers. Alldecisions regarding publication are made jointly by thetwo chief editors. A triage system has been introducedto determine rapidly if an article has a low likelihoodto reach priority for publication; this effort reducesreviewer burden and allows authors to have faster edi-torial decisions so as not to delay their opportunity tosubmit their triaged manuscript to another journal.New processes have been introduced to shorten thetime to evaluate new manuscripts and make editorialdecisions. A new system has been introduced with thepublisher to permit even faster expedited publicationof important articles. The editorial board continues toplay an active role in developing journal policy, andmeetings are held with the associate editors and mem-bers of the editorial board at regular intervals.
MDS in the Context of Other CurrentNeurological Organizations
In 1995 and in collaboration with the MDS, theAAN Section of Movement Disorders formed andwithin its rst year was the largest section in the orga-nization. Founded on the principles of regular rotationof leadership and open membership, this group has
served as an advisory body for the educational andscientic programs at the annual AAN meetings, witha core mission to develop and expand representationof movement disorder programs within the scienticsessions and teaching courses of this large, generalneurological venue. The AAN Movement DisorderSection leadership has a strong overlap with MDSmembership. Likewise, the MDS has an ofcial rela-tion with the European Federation of NeurologicalSciences, and the European Section of the MDS man-ages all movement disorder programs for the largersocietys annual congresses.
Toward the Future
In 2009, the MDS ofcers and leaders developed astrategic plan to focus the priority missions for thefuture. This meeting outlined a number of importantgoals and helped to dene key programs for futuredevelopment. Among these areas, special prioritywas placed on developing and delivering innovativeeducation that reects the broad and evolving needsof movement disorder professionals, increasing mem-bership from underrepresented regions and establish-ing afliate relationships with national movementdisorder and basal ganglia groups. The 20102013MDS Strategic Plan can be viewed on the MDS Website at http://www.movementdisorders.org. A particu-larly high focus has been placed on the directinvolvement of young society members in the scien-tic and administrative programs of the society inorder to enrich the ongoing historical tradition ofthe MDS.
References1. Goetz CG, Chmura TA, Lanska DJ. History of movement disor-
ders as a neurological specialty. Part 14 of the MDS-SponsoredHistory of Movement Disorders Exhibit, Barcelona, June 2000.Mov Disord. 2001;16:954959.
2. Cohen MM, ed. American Academy of Neurology 50th Anniver-sary. Minneapolis, MN: American Academy of Neurology Press;1998.
3. Fahn S: Interview. American Neurological Association Archives,2000.
4. ISMD Newsletter No. 1, Autumn 1987.
5. Hallett M. Oral History Archives, Movement Disorder Society,Milwaukee, WI, 2006.
6. Minutes of the First Executive Committee meeting of the Move-ment Disorder Society (MODIS), June 6. 1988. Movement Disor-der Society Archives, Milwaukee, WI.
7. Fahn S. State of the Society: memo to the International ExecutiveCommittee of the Movement Disorder Society (MODIS), 1991.Movement Disorder Society Archives, Milwaukee, WI.
8. Benecke R, Conrad B, Marsden CD, eds. Motor Disturbances I.London: Academic Press; 1987.
9. Berardelli A, Benecke R, Manfredi M, Marsden CD, eds. MotorDisturbances II. Sidcup: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Ltd.; 1990.
10. Minutes of the Combined ISMD and MODIS Business Meeting April25, 1990. Movement Disorder Society Archives, Milwaukee, WI.
11. Minutes of the First Business Meeting of the New Movement Dis-order Society, Friday, June 26, 1992, in Munich, Germany. Move-ment Disorder Society Archives, Milwaukee, WI.
H I S T O R Y O F M D S A N D M O V E M E N T D I S O R D E R S
Movement Disorders, Vol. 26, No. 6, 2011 945
12. Minutes of the Second Meeting of the International ExecutiveCommittee of the Movement Disorder Society, April 28, 1993.Movement Disorder Society Archives, Milwaukee, WI.
13. Movement Disorder Society. Movement Disorder Society Member-ship Directory. Milwaukee, WI: Movement Disorder Society Publi-cations; 2010.
14. Minutes of the Movement Disorder Society Second ExecutiveCommittee Meeting, April 13, 1989. Movement Disorder SocietyArchives, Milwaukee, WI.
15. Minutes of the International Executive Committee July 8, 1999.Movement Disorder Society Archives, Milwaukee, WI.
16. Minutes of the International Executive Committee March 4, 2005.Movement Disorder Society Archives, Milwaukee, WI.
17. Minutes of the Ofcers, June 26, 2008. Movement Disorder Soci-ety Archives, Milwaukee, WI.
18. Minutes of the International Executive Committee July 8, 1999.Movement Disorder Society Archives, Milwaukee, WI.
19. Minutes of the Ofcers, December 1, 2001. Movement DisorderSociety Archives, Milwaukee, WI.
20. Goetz CG, Tilley BC, Shaftman SR, et al, Movement Disorder So-ciety UPDRS Revision Task Force. Movement Disorder Society-sponsored revision of the Unied Parkinsons Disease Rating Scale(MDS-UPDRS): scale presentation and clinimetric testing results.Mov Disord. 2008;23:21292170.
21. Minutes of Advisory Meeting of the Movement Disorder Society, Sep-tember 25, 1989. Movement Disorder Society Archives, Milwaukee, WI.
G O E T Z A N D M C G H I E Y
946 Movement Disorders, Vol. 26, No. 6, 2011