Is FA+pahtoma+goljan+UW enough to get >250?

[ahmad sharawneh]

Is FA+pahtoma+goljan+UW enough to get >250?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[seminoma]

no

 

[Mad Jack]

no

 

[plasmodium]

no

I'm guessing you're implying it would also typically take a strong effort/performance in M1/M2?

 

[dfib slim]

I'm guessing you're implying it would also typically take a strong effort/performance in M1/M2?

Along with stellar test taking abilities and luck.

 

[Silverish]

I'll be 1000% honest. I don't think so. Some people say "All I used was UFAP and I got a 270".
Chances are... they are leaving some valuable information out of the equation.
I was always in the top half (most times top 10-20%) of my class throughout basic sciences, I have read First Aid more times than I've written my own name, Pathoma just the same and of course Uworld.
These things will give you a good basis of all the information, but will NOT give you enough to get a 250+.
As mentioned before, its being able to apply the information given you by UFAP. Many times, there are questions that are absolutely not even in all 3 sources - in which you have to make an educated guess.

So, to answer your question - no, not anyone who studied solely UFAP for 5+ years can get 250+.

 

[Reperfused]

I'll be 1000% honest. I don't think so. Some people say "All I used was UFAP and I got a 270".
Chances are... they are leaving some valuable information out of the equation.
I was always in the top half (most times top 10-20%) of my class throughout basic sciences, I have read First Aid more times than I've written my own name, Pathoma just the same and of course Uworld.
These things will give you a good basis of all the information, but will NOT give you enough to get a 250+.
As mentioned before, its being able to apply the information given you by UFAP. Many times, there are questions that are absolutely not even in all 3 sources - in which you have to make an educated guess.

So, to answer your question - no, not anyone who studied solely UFAP for 5+ years can get 250+.

& I 10,000 % agree with this!!!

 

[plasmodium]

It is the student who slacks/crams/coasts by in M1/M2, and then dedicates 1 month to studying UFAP who I don't think this method would work for to reach that high of a mark. I'm sure UFAP is the key to passing for these students, but a below-average student using UFAP for 1-2 months scoring in the 250s would probably be an anomaly.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm just an M2 and my thoughts may be skewed since I have not taken the Step yet and have developed most of my opinion based on the last 2 years of reading message boards and write-ups.

 

[PhillyMed777]

Kinda agree with all the above, you also have to consider the quality of studying with these resources. There is a HUGE difference in saying they read goljian RR b/w one who actually read and referenced the whole thing and one who skims randomly and doesn't really walk away with much.

The quality has to be there. Of course if all those resources were plastered in your brain you would get a 250. The issue is that not everyone works as hard to use the resources and knows them better than the next guy.

 

[Mad Jack]

It is the student who slacks/crams/coasts by in M1/M2, and then dedicates 1 month to studying UFAP who I don't think this method would work for to reach that high of a mark. I'm sure UFAP is the key to passing for these students, but a below-average student using UFAP for 1-2 months scoring in the 250s would probably be an anomaly.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm just an M2 and my thoughts may be skewed since I have not taken the Step yet and have developed most of my opinion based on the last 2 years of reading message boards and write-ups.

For 1-2 months? Dude, half the people in my class have been using them since day 1.

 

[plasmodium]

For 1-2 months? Dude, half the people in my class have been using them since day 1.

I personally believe that putting aside the USMLE-related resources until dedicated/late M2 is a better decision than using the resources too early. That is, unless your curriculum is completely research-based and unstructured.

A good school, with a solid USMLE-centered curriculum is basically like taking 2 year USMLE prep-course if utilized correctly. Any time spent towards those outside resources could have been spent further refining a strong foundation, tackling "lower-yield" concepts to piece together the whole picture. I feel the professors at these schools know what's "important," so they center what they teach around these ideas, but they fill in the blanks that are left out of the review books. This whole "high-yield" notion has tricked a lot of students (at least in my school) into thinking that they have a strong foundation if they know Pathoma or Sketchy Micro. Then when it comes to actually understanding the pathophysiology or microbiology behind what they've learned, they're generally lost since these resources are a bit too good at cutting the fat - the tip of the iceberg, if you will, more about brevity rather than depth and breadth. No hate, I assume they're solid for a first glance, or review for a student who has a strong foundation, but I assume it takes more than USMLE-based resources to hit 250+. I presume blunt memorization of buzzwords would not be enough.

Again, I've never taken the exam, so maybe I'm wrong.

 

[dfib slim]

I personally believe that putting aside the USMLE-related resources until dedicated/late M2 is a better decision than using the resources too early. That is, unless your curriculum is completely research-based and unstructured.

A good school, with a solid USMLE-centered curriculum is basically like taking 2 year USMLE prep-course if utilized correctly. Any time spent towards those outside resources could have been spent further refining a strong foundation, tackling "lower-yield" concepts to piece together the whole picture. I feel the professors at these schools know what's "important," so they center what they teach around these ideas, but they fill in the blanks that are left out of the review books. This whole "high-yield" notion has tricked a lot of students (at least in my school) into thinking that they have a strong foundation if they know Pathoma or Sketchy Micro. Then when it comes to actually understanding the pathophysiology or microbiology behind what they've learned, they're generally lost since these resources are a bit too good at cutting the fat - the tip of the iceberg, if you will, more about brevity rather than depth and breadth. No hate, I assume they're solid for a first glance, or review for a student who has a strong foundation, but I assume it takes more than USMLE-based resources to hit 250+. I presume blunt memorization of buzzwords would not be enough.

Again, I've never taken the exam, so maybe I'm wrong.

You should already be familiar with those resources by the time dedicated rolls around. I started 6 months early and wouldn't change a thing.

 

[plasmodium]

You should already be familiar with those resources by the time dedicated rolls around. I started 6 months early and wouldn't change a thing.

6 months is not the same as starting from day one, though. I started halfway into M2, but my foundation in the first year and a half was developed through textbooks and course material. For example, I think things would be a lot different for me had I decided to learn from BRS Physiology instead of from Boron. I wouldn't change a thing either. I've also heard stories about students from my school who didn't touch USMLE-based resources until dedicated and hit 250+. It seems that it's all about M1/M2.

 

[Dr.serotonin]

how about adding BRS physio + Kaplan pharma + Kaplan B. science + Kaplan immuno / micro to the UW Goljan and FA scheme? 250 still not achievable?

 

[Reperfused]

How about adding all the kaplan lecture notes plus videos (except patho ofcourse) & RX to the above combo of FA + Pathoma/Goljan + UWorld? Now?
When I say Pathoma/Goljan, I mean relying on Pathoma book + videos mainly but referencing Goljan for weak areas/insufficient chapters only.
Oh, and sprinkle a little bit of kaplan qbank here & there, too.
Now 250 achievable?

 

[plasmodium]

I don't think it's about the resources you use, I think it's about the person who's using them.

 

[Ophthoseidon]

Add wikipedia and you're set

 

[Mad Jack]

I personally believe that putting aside the USMLE-related resources until dedicated/late M2 is a better decision than using the resources too early. That is, unless your curriculum is completely research-based and unstructured.

A good school, with a solid USMLE-centered curriculum is basically like taking 2 year USMLE prep-course if utilized correctly. Any time spent towards those outside resources could have been spent further refining a strong foundation, tackling "lower-yield" concepts to piece together the whole picture. I feel the professors at these schools know what's "important," so they center what they teach around these ideas, but they fill in the blanks that are left out of the review books. This whole "high-yield" notion has tricked a lot of students (at least in my school) into thinking that they have a strong foundation if they know Pathoma or Sketchy Micro. Then when it comes to actually understanding the pathophysiology or microbiology behind what they've learned, they're generally lost since these resources are a bit too good at cutting the fat - the tip of the iceberg, if you will, more about brevity rather than depth and breadth. No hate, I assume they're solid for a first glance, or review for a student who has a strong foundation, but I assume it takes more than USMLE-based resources to hit 250+. I presume blunt memorization of buzzwords would not be enough.

Again, I've never taken the exam, so maybe I'm wrong.

My entire school curriculum is geared toward making us good clinicians, with boards as a secondary goal. We've got an excellent reputation during rotations because of this, but we really have to put in a lot of extra work during MS2 to get exceptional board scores.

 

[plasmodium]

My entire school curriculum is geared toward making us good clinicians, with boards as a secondary goal. We've got an excellent reputation during rotations because of this, but we really have to put in a lot of extra work during MS2 to get exceptional board scores.

I feel that I am fortunate in that my school is pretty balanced between both aspects of becoming a physician - clinical skill/knowledge, and step 1 foundation. Personally, I used my school's curriculum as a guide to what's important for the USMLE, but decided to delve deeper into the more challenging textbooks (Boron, Robbins, Kandel) to build a stronger foundation. Now as a late M2 I have begun more board-focused study. It's interesting to hear experiences from other students at other schools. I'm sure your curriculum will be very beneficial come rotations/residency, as you mentioned.

 

[seminoma]

I personally believe that putting aside the USMLE-related resources until dedicated/late M2 is a better decision than using the resources too early. That is, unless your curriculum is completely research-based and unstructured.

A good school, with a solid USMLE-centered curriculum is basically like taking 2 year USMLE prep-course if utilized correctly. Any time spent towards those outside resources could have been spent further refining a strong foundation, tackling "lower-yield" concepts to piece together the whole picture. I feel the professors at these schools know what's "important," so they center what they teach around these ideas, but they fill in the blanks that are left out of the review books. This whole "high-yield" notion has tricked a lot of students (at least in my school) into thinking that they have a strong foundation if they know Pathoma or Sketchy Micro. Then when it comes to actually understanding the pathophysiology or microbiology behind what they've learned, they're generally lost since these resources are a bit too good at cutting the fat - the tip of the iceberg, if you will, more about brevity rather than depth and breadth. No hate, I assume they're solid for a first glance, or review for a student who has a strong foundation, but I assume it takes more than USMLE-based resources to hit 250+. I presume blunt memorization of buzzwords would not be enough.

Again, I've never taken the exam, so maybe I'm wrong.

Not all schools have a USMLE-centered curriculum (mine, for example).

I disagree with setting aside USMLE-related resources with one exception, UWorld. Save UW for dedicated. Otherwise, you should be using some sort of USMLE prep resource to guide you through MS2 and to make sure you're not missing out on huge chunks of material. For example, at my school we didn't discuss inhaled or iv anesthetics and while it's a relatively lower-yield step 1 topic, if I hadn't looked in FA during pharm/neuro then I would've seen those drugs and concepts for the first time 6 weeks before step 1.

Bottom line is that 250 is a hell of a score that takes a lot to achieve.

 

[W19]

I am abandoning my school coursework altogether in January and start studying for that beast. My score in Kaplan so far is atrocious... 58%

We only have 2 months dedicated time... UFAP+ Goljan RR... >=230

 

[Elevencents]

People need to understand there is no magic formula to 250+. You can't add "insert resource" and gain 5 points to your score. That's now how it works. Some only use UFAP, some use every resource under the sun. And those who only use UFAP may score better than those who use everything. There is no secret combination. The less time you spend looking for the holy grail the better off you'll be. Find some review books that you like, hit Qbanks hard if that's your thing, and crush it.

 

[nabilesmail]

Just curious but is a 250 really that difficult to get? Isn't that about 1 STD above the average USMLE-Taker? Good score but by no means impossible, about 20% of all Medical students will get a 250++

 

[seminoma]

I am abandoning my school coursework altogether in January and start studying for that beast. My score in Kaplan so far is atrocious... 58%

We only have 2 months dedicated time... UFAP+ Goljan RR... >=230

2 months is a lot of time.

Just curious but is a 250 really that difficult to get? Isn't that about 1 STD above the average USMLE-Taker? Good score but by no means impossible, about 20% of all Medical students will get a 250++

250 is the 85th percentile for US and Canadian test takers. It's not impossible, but being in the top 15% of a group made up mostly of hard working and intelligent people is not easy. 250 is viewed very highly everywhere except SDN.

 

[W19]

2 months is a lot of time.

Technically it's 8 weeks... There is a lot to learn and I have to go over MS1 materials thoroughly since I forgot most of these stuff; therefore, I don't think 8 weeks is a lot of time.

 

[seminoma]

Technically it's 8 weeks... There is a lot to learn and I have to go over MS1 materials thoroughly since I forgot most of these stuff; therefore, I don't think 8 weeks is a lot of time.

Haha yeah I'm aware how many weeks are in a month. I don't know of many schools that give students 8 weeks to study. I can tell you that I probably wouldn't have done better if I studied for an extra 2 weeks.

By week 2 my NBME scores looked the same as they did at the end of week 6. Maybe that means I dicked around too much during the last 4 weeks or maybe that means 2-3 weeks worth of info was all I could fit in my head.. I don't know.

By the end of week 4 I was so tired of studying that I didn't study for 2-3 days during week 5.

 

[W19]

Haha yeah I'm aware how many weeks are in a month. I don't know of many schools that give students 8 weeks to study. I can tell you that I probably wouldn't have done better if I studied for an extra 2 weeks. By week 2 my NBME scores looked the same as they did at the end of week 6. By the end of week 4 I was so tired of studying that I didn't study for 2-3 days during week 5.

I am a little below average in my class rank-wise, so I need all the time I can get... However, you might be correct because burn out is a real concern when studying 12 hrs/day for 2 months. Maybe I should study for 6 weeks and use the last 2 weeks for vacation... I am just shooting for an average score. I will obviously study to get 300, but we all know miracle does not happen overnight.

 

[seminoma]

I am a little below average in my class rank-wise, so I need all the time I can get... However, you might be correct because burn out is a real concern when studying 12 hrs/day for 2 months. Maybe I should study for 6 weeks and use the last 2 weeks for vacation... I am just shooting for an average score. I will obviously study to get 300, but we all know miracle does not happen overnight.

Study hard for 4-6 weeks and enjoy the leftover time for vacation. An extra 2 weeks probably isn't going to change your score significantly regardless of class rank.

That said, when I was an MS2 lots of people gave me the same advice and I ignored them.. it didn't help that my school has an award for highest step 1 score each year and I would've been kind of upset if I didn't get it. Hindsight is 20/20. Do what's necessary to be comfortable knowing that you worked your hardest and did your best.

 

[Mad Jack]

I am abandoning my school coursework altogether in January and start studying for that beast. My score in Kaplan so far is atrocious... 58%

We only have 2 months dedicated time... UFAP+ Goljan RR... >=230

Brosephine, I'm in the same boat as you with the Kaplan scores. Don't stress, that's about where all of my classmates are.

 

[Ophthoseidon]

I honestly think you can get >250 with this, but take it with a grain of salt since I haven't taken the exam yet. My school does give NBME exams for assessment though, so even though we aren't "taught towards the boards" we are assessed based on board material. Many students don't highly rely on lecture material and study whatever they want (Robbins, Goljan, BRS, wiki, FA, Pathoma, qbanks, etc.). I have found that the >250 scorers generally adhere to "learn the high yield" policy. If your foundation comes from the high yield sources and making sure you understand them with the internet, 250+ in definitely attainable.

 

[malin]

My opinion: it's debatable. Another question is how much are you supplementing those 3 resources w/ your med school curriculum. There are TONS of questions on Step 1 that you won't find in any of those 3 resources. But perhaps not enough to dip you below 250. Some of those questions you can answer if you've developed good critical thinking skills.

In my opinion, yes, with UW, FA, and Pathoma, you can score 250+, and when you add Goljan into the mix, it makes it more likely. Of course, nearly everyone uses these 3 resources; it's HOW you use them that differentiates 250ers from 230ers and 240ers. Those who are just skimming and passively reading won't do as well as those who are actually retaining all the information in these books and develop robust test taking skills from really analyzing the questions they're getting right and wrong.

I scored 250+ on Step 1 w/ UWorld, FA, Pathoma. I used the Brosencephalon deck (which are just Anki cards of First Aid and Pathoma; also adds a small bit of Robbins into the mix, but not that much) to make sure I retained the information. I spent nearly 10mins per UWorld question by writing down its content into its corresponding part of First Aid. I also used Picmonic, which is basically a creative way to memorize all the pharm and micro in First Aid. The other thing I'm leaving out of the picture is that I did a ton of NBME exams to hone my test taking skills. And with my med school curriculum, I didn't really prioritize it. Like if we were in a GI and Endocrine block, I would learn all the GI and endocrine from the step 1 resources I mentioned (and hardly look at our school's stuff), and then just look at our school's syllabus shortly before the test to make sure I would pass them (I didn't destroy them, but still wouldn't do too bad on the exams). I also used some outside videos to re-review the Biochem (which I hardly saw on my Step 1), but primarily focused on what was in First Aid. I had certainly glanced at Goljan and Clinical Micro intermittently during the year, but not that seriously (it was more of a reference here or there, rather than a serious commitment).

Overall, I scored 250+ by using UW, FA, Pathoma, and using creative ways to learn them (Brosencephalon, Anki, Picmonic), and really focusing on test taking skills by really breaking down the UW questions and taking multiple NBMEs and learning from them.

I think in general, people should prioritize UW, FA, and Pathoma above all other resources, but definitely supplement them with other books like Goljan, Clinical Micro Made Simple, BRS Physio, etc, to get exposed to all the other details that can be tested on Step 1.

 

[doctorknownothing]

YES! absolute mastery of those materials is more then enough...

But to elaborate, you need to have the ability to apply each concept, because the step will try to distort, distract, and overall confuse the crap out of you for fun. besides think about it, everybody is in the same boat... if there was a magic book that only the top 16% (250+) knew about that would be the craziest secret since who really killed JFK.

In conclusion, UFAP and goljan are there because Darwin says only the strong survive (or atleast the most efficient)... but in reality what will separate you will always be your ability/talent and the hard work you put in, not what book you choose to study. AND GUESS WHAT!? you can't control talent, SOOO GET TO WORK!!!!!

 

[Ophthoseidon]

YES! absolute mastery of those materials is more then enough...

But to elaborate, you need to have the ability to apply each concept, because the step will try to distort, distract, and overall confuse the crap out of you for fun. besides think about it, everybody is in the same boat... if there was a magic book that only the top 16% (250+) knew about that would be the craziest secret since who really killed JFK.

In conclusion, UFAP and goljan are there because Darwin says only the strong survive (or atleast the most efficient)... but in reality what will separate you will always be your ability/talent and the hard work you put in, not what book you choose to study. AND GUESS WHAT!? you can't control talent, SOOO GET TO WORK!!!!!

But... but you know nothing

 

[ahmad sharawneh]

Very helpful discussion . Thnx for everybody . My dream is to become a radiologist in USA.it very hard not impossible . And wish you luck and success in your lives.

 

[Phloston]

Is FA+pahtoma+goljan+UW enough to get >250?

People have done well using any number of permutations of prep methods. So your answer is yes. In reality the pathway to a good numerical outcome is very complex and depends on lots of things. But your short answer is yes.

 

[spicysoup55]

Do you guys recommend committing everything in UFAP to memory, or is the goal just to understand the concepts enough to apply them during the test?

What about Goljan? Sketchy? USMLE-RX?

 

[DrPicard]

Goal is both. You should try to both memorize and understand whats inside FA.

 

[VenuSN]

Do you guys recommend committing everything in UFAP to memory, or is the goal just to understand the concepts enough to apply them during the test?

What about Goljan? Sketchy? USMLE-RX?

Short answer: BOTH. One without the other would just make for a mediocre/low score

 

[FiveOClock]

I don't think it's about the resources you use, I think it's about the person who's using them.

You can make a 270 using only those resources if you truly understand what you're learning rather than just memorizing. If you really understand why the caudate nucleus atrophies in Huntington's then you know a hell of lot more about it then the person who just memorized the path pic.