Who are the key neurologists and psychiatrists who publicly commented on Donald Trump's cognition in 2023?

1. Who repeatedly spoke up: familiar psychiatrists and psychologists

Several clinicians who have been public critics of Trump for years are cited across the assembled material: Bandy X. Lee (organizer of the Yale/Duty to Warn activity and editor of The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump) and colleagues who contributed to that 2017 book and subsequent panels are repeatedly named as vocal warners of danger and impaired fitness ^{[3] [4]}. Newsweek and other outlets cite psychiatrists such as Lance Dodes and long-time participants in Duty to Warn making blunt statements about dementia or “overwhelming” evidence of cognitive problems ^{[5] [2]}. The Daily Beast quotes psychologist John Gartner calling clinical signs consistent with dementia and describing “phonemic paraphasias” as diagnostic clues ^[1].

2. Neurologists, gait experts and cognitive-test commentators

The material mentions neurologically framed observations — e.g., commentators pointing to gait, posture and speech as signs that warrant neurologic explanation — and references the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) as the test that has been discussed publicly ^{[6] [7]}. The MoCA’s creator, Dr. Ziad Nasreddine, is cited in background about the test historically, but the current packet does not include a 2023 quote from Nasreddine specifically about Trump ^[8]. Multiple pieces note doctors (including White House physicians in later years) reporting MoCA results, but available sources do not list independent neurologists who publicly evaluated Trump in 2023 by name in this set ^{[7] [9]}.

3. Variations in discipline, message and ethics

Sources show a split in approach: some psychiatrists and psychologists publicly warn (Duty to Warn, conferences, op-eds), sometimes offering clinical diagnoses or asserting dangerousness; others and major medical-ethics voices (e.g., NEJM and APA-related debate summarized in these items) stress the Goldwater Rule and caution against remote diagnosis without examination ^{[3] [10]}. That ethical debate frames why some clinicians speak bluntly and others remain circumspect or refuse to issue formal diagnoses in media ^[10].

4. Examples of decisive commentary cited in these reports

• John Gartner, a psychologist/former Johns Hopkins faculty member, told The Daily Beast that he sees signs “linked to dementia” including phonemic paraphasias (speech errors) and argued Trump shows “massive increase” in clinical signs ^[1].
• Lance Dodes, a psychiatrist, is quoted saying evidence of dementia is “overwhelming” in a March 2024 Newsweek item that summarizes clinicians’ views ^[5].
• Bandy X. Lee and participants in the Yale/Duty to Warn gatherings have publicly warned since 2017 and continued to be referenced as leading clinicians who comment on Trump’s mental fitness ^{[3] [2]}.

5. Limits of the present evidence and what’s not found here

The provided search results do not produce a clean, dated list specifically of “key neurologists and psychiatrists who publicly commented on Donald Trump’s cognition in 2023” as a discrete set. Many citations recount longstanding critics (2017 onward) or report later/earlier commentary and analyses (2018–2025); the packet lacks a definitive 2023-only roll call or contemporaneous 2023 quotes for all the named figures ^{[3] [1] [5]}. Available sources do not mention some high-profile neurologists by name as 2023 commentators — if you want an exhaustive, year-limited list we should search databases or press archives limited to 2023.

6. How to read these voices — competing perspectives and possible agendas

Clinicians who speak publicly about a political leader face professional-ethics constraints and may also hold explicit political commitments; the sources note Duty to Warn members defend a “duty to warn” while critics accuse them of breaching the Goldwater Rule ^{[3] [10]}. Some commentators highlight objective neurologic signs (gait, speech patterns, MoCA items) while others foreground personality, political behavior and risk — a distinction that signals clinical vs. public-safety framing and potential advocacy agendas ^{[6] [4]}. Readers should weigh that disagreement and remember the sources in this set do not document formal, in-person clinical exams of Trump in 2023 by independent neurologists.

If you want, I can run a targeted search of 2023 press and academic coverage (AP, NYT, STAT, JAMA, NEJM, major TV transcripts) to compile a strict, dated list of clinicians who commented in 2023 and provide exact quotes and dates.