The cluelessness of some nurse practitioners is breathtaking, not to mention the arrogance. NP Barela here thinks that she knows enough to build the curriculum for a neurology fellowship/residency.

Here is the physician's perspective on this: Neurology is widely considered to be one of the most intellectually complex and cerebral medical specialties. An attending neurologist must complete four years of medical school, one year of general internship in either a preliminary or transitional year at the PGY-1 level, followed by three years of intense, neurology-specific residency training possibly followed by fellowship in a number of subspecialty areas. Then, they must prove they have mastered the specialty through passage of the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology (ABPN) board exam.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/shari-barela-msn-aprn-np-bc-21a4691a0/

Let's take a look at the Sonoma State University MSN program:

https://nursing.sonoma.edu/academic-programs/msn/msn-curriculum


It's abundantly clear that this primary care-oriented program would have provided minimal, if any exposure to the field of neurology. In any case, trying to compare the education, training, experience, and academic credentials of a board-certified attending neurologist with an NP who graduated from a 46-credit-hour program is downright impossible, if not highly insulting. And yet, this nurse practitioner thinks that she some how possesses the qualifications to determine the content covered in a neurology fellowship/residency? The Dunning–Kruger effect is very, very strong with this one.