Costanzo or Guyton physiology book for Step 1 ?

[Kobebucsfan]

people said Costanzo is better for Med school but when i do Kaplan physio Q's, they r asking stuff that was never mentioned in Costanzo and this worries me.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Excelsior_3]

have you tried BRS?

 

[Serous Demilune]

have you tried BRS?

Idk if you're serious. BRS is Costanzo in outline form.

 

[Smokemont]

Learn the physio that's in first aid. Remember that question banks are primarily for learning, not assessment. If you come across something not in first aid then annotate it in.

 

[Excelsior_3]

Idk if you're serious. BRS is Costanzo in outline form.

sorry I forgot to finish that with a ""

 

[DermViser]

have you tried BRS?

You know that BRS is an outline form of her bigger text, right?

 

[DermViser]

people said Costanzo is better for Med school but when i do Kaplan physio Q's, they r asking stuff that was never mentioned in Costanzo and this worries me.

Kaplan Qbank Physiology questions are not good IMHO. People told me that the Kaplan questions tend to conveniently be able to be answered in their Kaplan Lecture Notes which you conveniently have to buy by paying for their courses. Not a good Qbank resource IMHO vs. better alternatives.

 

[DermViser]

Learn the physio that's in first aid. Remember that question banks are primarily for learning, not assessment. If you come across something not in first aid then annotate it in.

No Qbanks are for learning AND assessment.

 

[PL198]

What about USMLEquickprep as a Qbank?

 

[DermViser]

What about USMLEquickprep as a Qbank?

Never heard of it. Of course, everyone and their mom is trying to cash in on the USMLE Step 1 market these days, so I'm sure there is someone out there who will say it's useful.

 

[PL198]

It's free. You have to make an account, but I think it's like roughly 5k questions
http://www.usmlequickprep.com/login/index.php

 

[DermViser]

It's free. You have to make an account, but I think it's like roughly 5k questions
http://www.usmlequickprep.com/login/index.php

I did. Then it says, "Can not edit own profile, sorry." I've never created a profile on this site.

 

[Anastomoses]

people said Costanzo is better for Med school but when i do Kaplan physio Q's, they r asking stuff that was never mentioned in Costanzo and this worries me.

There is a lot of information in Guyton that isn't "integrated" and won't give you the bottom line or application. It's basically like this mammoth foundation that gets refined when you get into pathologies.

Costanzo is far more practical and useful, unless you're doing an MD/Phd.

 

[DermViser]

There is a lot of information in Guyton that isn't "integrated" and won't give you the bottom line or application. It's basically like this mammoth foundation that gets refined when you get into pathologies.

Costanzo is far more practical and useful, unless you're doing an MD/Phd.

Guyton is bad, in that respect, and I would say Boron and Boulpaep (which they use at Yale) is even worse for med students purposes, probably better for the PhD student (or MD/PhD).

Part of the problem with physiology texts these days is that they are straight physiology (naturally as they are written by PhDs). The boards has moved away from that and instead tests your knowledge of physiology through pathologic conditions (i.e. Pathophysiology) which tests your ability to not just memorize but apply physiologic principles.

 

[Nephronlearner]

Guyton is bad, in that respect, and I would say Boron and Boulpaep (which they use at Yale) is even worse for med students purposes, probably better for the PhD student (or MD/PhD).

Part of the problem with physiology texts these days is that they are straight physiology (naturally as they are written by PhDs). The boards has moved away from that and instead tests your knowledge of physiology through pathologic conditions (i.e. Pathophysiology) which tests your ability to not just memorize but apply physiologic principles.

There is a lot of information in Guyton that isn't "integrated" and won't give you the bottom line or application. It's basically like this mammoth foundation that gets refined when you get into pathologies.

Costanzo is far more practical and useful, unless you're doing an MD/Phd.

Perfectly put. My school follows Guyton religiously. Personally, I found it very hard to read, non-practical for a medical student. I used Costanzo and never regretted it. Yes, it lacks some details and if school exams are based on Guyton's book, then it probably isn't enough to rock them, but likely more than enough to pass.
It is much less time consuming and much better for a medical student. And as it turned out, when pathology started, those of us who had used Costanzo had better understanding of physiology than the majority who had used Guyton's. Probably related to the size of the book. So, I'd strongly recommend Costanzo! (both the BRS and the actual textbook)

 

[DermViser]

Perfectly put. My school follows Guyton religiously. Personally, I found it very hard to read, non-practical for a medical student. I used Costanzo and never regretted it. Yes, it lacks some details and if school exams are based on Guyton's book, then it probably isn't enough to rock them, but likely more than enough to pass.
It is much less time consuming and much better for a medical student. And as it turned out, when pathology started, those of us who had used Costanzo had better understanding of physiology than the majority who had used Guyton's. Probably related to the size of the book. So, I'd strongly recommend Costanzo! (both the BRS and the actual textbook)

I always think it's funny that medical schools across the world use textbooks and review books written in the United States. Never understood why. But yes, Guyton has been a staple for the teaching of physiology in medical school for several decades now in many countries.

 

[Nephronlearner]

I always think it's funny that medical schools across the world use textbooks and review books written in the United States. Never understood why. But yes, Guyton has been a staple for the teaching of physiology in medical school for several decades now in many countries.

Not all the books used over here are American, but some are. Generally, faculty isn't interested in writing their own books so it is much simpler to translate them (and those books have generally gone through many editions so they are 'safe choices'). Picking American (and, rarely, German) textbooks can be expected since most professors speak English (and/or German).

Guyton is a classic textbook, used almost everywhere (at my school it has been the textbook of choice for over 30 years) but in my opinion, relatively useless for a medical student (similar to Robbins, which I bought, even though it wasn't the recommended reading for my path course, and ended up barely opening it).

We have been told by the professors countless times that the only way to learn basic sciences properly is to read and re-read and re-re-read textbooks, something I never really understood, nor tried doing.
Such view resulted in plenty of departments re-introducing archaic oral exams leading to complete chaos, in my opinion, but it seems to be a common practice in plenty of European countries.
American medical schools seem to be a doing a better job in organising basic science classes.

 

[DermViser]

Not all the books used over here are American, but some are. Generally, faculty isn't interested in writing their own books so it is much simpler to translate them (and those books have generally gone through many editions so they are 'safe choices'). Picking American (and, rarely, German) textbooks can be expected since most professors speak English (and/or German).

Guyton is a classic textbook, used almost everywhere (at my school it has been the textbook of choice for over 30 years) but in my opinion, relatively useless for a medical student (similar to Robbins, which I bought, even though it wasn't the recommended reading for my path course, and ended up barely opening it).

We have been told by the professors countless times that the only way to learn basic sciences properly is to read and re-read and re-re-read textbooks, something I never really understood, nor tried doing. Such view resulted in plenty of departments re-introducing archaic oral exams leading to complete chaos, in my opinion, but it seems to be a common practice in plenty of European countries. American medical schools seem to be a doing a better job in organising basic science classes.

I don't know about Europe but in America, medicine is highly professionalized (i.e. college + MCAT decides if you go to med school, etc.)

I think professors used to do that here, but this was mainly from PhD professors who are not clinicians and have absolutely no clinical experience. That being said medical schools are turning more towards PBL/TBL type curriculums, bc medicine is a "life-long learning" profession, so having the expectation that all your information comes from one textbook is antiquated. It's the way undergrad can be, but I guess a professional school is supposed to be different.

And yes, Robbins is a staple of Pathology courses across the United States as well. I knew a girl who used Rubin's as her text for the Pathology course, but that's bc the author of the book was the course director for the course.

 

[Brain Bucket]

I actually read a lot of Boron. I preferred it to Guyton, but there's no question that Costanzo is clutch.

 

[DermViser]

I actually read a lot of Boron. I preferred it to Guyton, but there's no question that Costanzo is clutch.

That book had so much ridiculous cell biology and signal transduction mess, it was really hard to separate the forest from the trees. Not that Guyton isn't any better. Costanzo's textbook is the best by far. On another note, I'm always curious how much the text and figures actually change, to justify putting out a new and more expensive edition every time.

 

[Smokemont]

Learn the physio that's in first aid. Remember that question banks are primarily for learning, not assessment. If you come across something not in first aid then annotate it in.

No Qbanks are for learning AND assessment.

Did you miss the word "primarily"

I expect more out of someone who spends their life on this forum

 

[Brain Bucket]

I borrowed an old edition from the library, it was rumored that the physio prof here picked minutiae from that text. That comment about Cell Bio reminded me - We had to read Alberts' in college. Jesus that was fun.

 

[DermViser]

Did you miss the word "primarily"

I expect more out of someone who spends their life on this forum

Except they aren't "primarily" for learning. It's both equally.

 

[DermViser]

I borrowed an old edition from the library, it was rumored that the physio prof here picked minutiae from that text. That comment about Cell Bio reminded me - We had to read Alberts' in college. Jesus that was fun.

Now that book is DEFINITELY for PhDs. The smaller book version of that text - Essential Cell Biology is much better.

 

[Nephronlearner]

I don't know about Europe but in America, medicine is highly professionalized (i.e. college + MCAT decides if you go to med school, etc.)

I think professors used to do that here, but this was mainly from PhD professors who are not clinicians and have absolutely no clinical experience. That being said medical schools are turning more towards PBL/TBL type curriculums, bc medicine is a "life-long learning" profession, so having the expectation that all your information comes from one textbook is antiquated. It's the way undergrad can be, but I guess a professional school is supposed to be different.

And yes, Robbins is a staple of Pathology courses across the United States as well. I knew a girl who used Rubin's as her text for the Pathology course, but that's bc the author of the book was the course director for the course.

Over here, students enter the medical school after finishing the high school (and in most countries sitting an entrance exam, similar to MCAT). Medicine usually lasts 5-6 years, with 1st year covering 'pre-med subjects' and then from year 2 onwards it gets similar to medical school in America. The organisation varies between countries. There is oversight, but education isn't as standardised as in the US. Also, some countries apparently offer programmes taught in English, mainly for foreigners, which is basically 'the Caribbean of Europe'. That being said, someone who goes to medical school in Western Europe will probably be as well trained as someone in America, while plenty of others, won't. So, overall I would say that the US medical schools are on average better (quality isn't nearly as variable between states, as it is between European countries).

Most of the professors over here are PhD's (in fact, almost all), true PBL probably doesn't exist outside of UK, and most countries offer traditional curricula (subject based).

Robbins is a great text but... simply waaay too much, in my opinion.

 

[Brain Bucket]

I'll just add that they're mostly MD/PhDs, and medicine is taught in the local language (other than in the English programs as mentioned by NL).

 

[Nephronlearner]

I'll just add that they're mostly MD/PhDs, and medicine is taught in the local language (other than in the English programs as mentioned by NL).

Well yes, of course, all countries teach in their native languages, but some (including Italy, I believe) teach in English as well, I am not sure what's the quality of those programmes, but generally, native language programmes are well regulated and good.

 

[masaraksh]

Not all the books used over here are American, but some are. Generally, faculty isn't interested in writing their own books so it is much simpler to translate them (and those books have generally gone through many editions so they are 'safe choices'). Picking American (and, rarely, German) textbooks can be expected since most professors speak English (and/or German).

I'm not sure if I'd go with a German physio book. I plan on studying human physio and medicine.

 

[Nephronlearner]

I'm not sure if I'd go with a German physio book. I plan on studying human physio and medicine.

haha, trust me it's similar for the most part (even though I have never actually used any of the German books)

 

[DrEnderW]

I knew a girl who used Rubin's as her text for the Pathology course, but that's bc the author of the book was the course director for the course.

Rubins isn't bad and is used a lot at my school for whatever reason.

From what I've seen, it's in between Robbins and Goljan RR in terms of detail/overkill. As in, I still won't be reading it... but if I was, I would enjoy it more than Robbins and would just want to just use Goljan/Pathoma the entire time.

 

[Brain Bucket]

Just to clear something up for people who haven't started MS-2: Goljan isn't lacking in detail. Knowing it will earn you a phenomenal shelf score.

 

[VisionaryTics]

Except they aren't "primarily" for learning. It's both equally.

I disagree. I think NBMEs and UWSAs are for assessment.

Saying UWorld is for assessment is like saying Costanzo is for assessment. UWorld is a teaching tool in question-answer format. I never recommended underclassmen treat it like an assessment because they end up "saving" UWorld until the last month. No, you want to go over UWorld as many times as possible because it's a learning tool.

 

[DermViser]

I disagree. I think NBMEs and UWSAs are for assessment.

Saying UWorld is for assessment is like saying Costanzo is for assessment. UWorld is a teaching tool in question-answer format. I never recommended underclassmen treat it like an assessment because they end up "saving" UWorld until the last month. No, you want to go over UWorld as many times as possible because it's a learning tool.

Yes, but esp. near the end, closer to your test date it becomes an assessment tool and has been used as such.

 

[DermViser]

Just to clear something up for people who haven't started MS-2: Goljan isn't lacking in detail. Knowing it will earn you a phenomenal shelf score.

For the shelf, I thought BRS Path was more than enough, since the shelf is only Path specific.

 

[Brain Bucket]

For the shelf, I thought BRS Path was more than enough, since the shelf is only Path specific.

I can't speak to that, since I didn't use BRS, but I can say that my shelf score was higher than anyone who used BRS in my class.

 

[Nephronlearner]

I don't know about the shelf exam (obviously, since I have never taken any) but I have given all the popular books a go throughout my pathology course and here are some thoughts:

Pathoma: amazing! Lots of material on ~200 pages, made very simple, excellent introduction to pathology... but probably not detailed enough for any path course.

BRS Path: excellent 'pure pathology' review. After learning what's in Pathoma BRS often seemed like a great book to add path details (Pathoma does a good job with pathophysiology). Overall, Pathoma + BRS is a great combination

RR Path: lacks some details from BRS path (talking about path only). It does, however, cover a huuuge number of diseases that I haven't seen in any of the other 2 books, it explains pathophysiology of many, it integrates path with other subjects - overall excellent book to truly master the material (after learning the basics from another source)... huge time commitment, though (800 pages of bullet points :S)

Robbins: um... good reference, next to impossible to actually memorise

What I did afterall - course notes plus Pathoma (IMO best way to do it)
Pathoma was a good overview and is likely to be very useful for Step 1, but considering that it is the school professors who make tests (unless some school uses only the shelves, don't know how common that is) - and questions usually come out of whatever resource the school suggests

 

[notbobtrustme]

Just to clear something up for people who haven't started MS-2: Goljan isn't lacking in detail. Knowing it will earn you a phenomenal shelf score.

It's the ****ing answer key as far as I'm concerned. Used that plus some Pathoma and missed 4 questions total for a score of 880.