Anki users - how do you maintain the bigger picture?

[redblue]

I've been using Anki for two months or so, and I've noticed that my retention of high-yield minutiae is very good. Unfortunately, I'm having a hard time retaining how these minutiae fit into the bigger picture and how they'll be applicable for Step 1 or clinically. Any Anki users have advice on remembering how everything fits together?

Thank you!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[AtlasCarraway]

"High-yield minutiae" is kind of an oxymoron in the first place. One thing that helps me get the big picture is forcing myself to either "teach" the material I've memorized to a classmate (or just talk through it out loud) so that you can coherently recall the things you're learning.

Also, practice questions. My last 2-3 days prior to a test are almost exclusively: Anki runthroughs -> do practice Qs -> talk through it with people -> repeat. That tends to help me the most with keeping a coherent big picture going.

 

[eefen]

I don't know how you are using anki, or what you're putting in your cards, but if it's just minutia, then yeah I could see that.

Yes, some cards are just random facts...but some can be something like explain xyz concept, or whatever. Also, understanding is itself composed of discreet facts - I personally find that I frequently have "aha" moments after reviewing a card for the tenth time. In other words, sometimes it's because I've memorized 7 seemingly random facts that I can appreciate how they all come together.

 

[redblue]

Also, understanding is itself composed of discreet facts - I personally find that I frequently have "aha" moments after reviewing a card for the tenth time. In other words, sometimes it's because I've memorized 7 seemingly random facts that I can appreciate how they all come together.

I've definitely had a bunch of those moments, and when I'm learning material, I have an outline of how things fit together in each lecture which helps me integrate the material. I guess my main issue is that I don't want to make too many cards reinforcing the outline, but I also don't want to keep referring back to different outlines when I'm reviewing materials from past blocks and have forgotten how some of the pieces fit together.

As an example of what I consider high-yield but random fact, I've learned about the recurrent laryngeal nerve and how it can be damaged through thyroid surgeries and FA also has that it can be damaged from left atrium swelling. I think it's high-yield because 1) it's in FA and 2) it's clinically relevant, but it really isn't a big picture concept. My issue is that I also have a card that the nerve runs with the inferior thyroid artery, and I have separate cards for the branches of the subclavian and branches of the thyrocervical trunk. Maybe my memory is just bad, but I sometimes don't have those "aha" moments and just forget where the inferior thyroid comes from and I have to search it on wiki to remind myself. Is there a better way to integrate everything? Or should I just try to force myself to keep connecting everything while reviewing and over time it sticks?

 

[eefen]

I would say use media liberally. I dont know if, for example, the cards you have for the recurrent laryngeal nerve and it's pathway is.just a basic text flashcard, or if it's an image occlusion card.

If it's the former, I'd say try to throw a picture of the relevant structures in the answer portion of the card. That way, whenever you review the card, you see a big-picture reminder of how all the structures work together. Or just use image occlusion liberally...that's what I tend to do. That way, you're forced to review not only the course of a random nerve but also how it relates to other structures.

Regarding your outlines...,honestly, those are the types of things that would probably be the best things to make cards out of. You can make cards for random facts, too, but at the end of the day it's more important that you have the big picture down pat - that way, you can reason through a lot of the minutia.

 

[Buttermellow]

If it's the former, I'd say try to throw a picture of the relevant structures in the answer portion of the card. That way, whenever you review the card, you see a big-picture reminder of how all the structures work together.

When I started adding pictures to the answer portion, I found my retention went up significantly. I'm a very visual person, so having that picture there every time was great. I'd definitely recommend this.

 

[gregoryhouse]

When I first started using anki, I would only have very specific things in the text fields like
"Front: What protein is affected in Osteogenesis Imperfecta?
Back: Collagen"

The thing I didn't like about doing that though is exactly what you are saying, you lose the big picture. It also takes too many cards to do that. Now what I'm trying to do and so far I like is that I'll make cards with the name of the disease on the front of the card, and all the details about that disease on the back. Then I'll color code the stuff that I think are the most important to remember. That way when I look at I card I can make sure I hit those keywords or phrases but also have extra material to look at if I've forgotten the background of those factoids. Also in my head at least, it makes more sense to do it this way because in real life when you think about a disease you are going to want to remember as much about it as possible at once and not little factoids about it separately.

Another thing I've just recently started doing is to have the clinical presentation of the disease on the front and the name of the disease and treatment on the back

 

[chronicidal]

When I first started using anki, I would only have very specific things in the text fields like
"Front: What protein is affected in Osteogenesis Imperfecta?
Back: Collagen"

The thing I didn't like about doing that though is exactly what you are saying, you lose the big picture. It also takes too many cards to do that. Now what I'm trying to do and so far I like is that I'll make cards with the name of the disease on the front of the card, and all the details about that disease on the back. Then I'll color code the stuff that I think are the most important to remember. That way when I look at I card I can make sure I hit those keywords or phrases but also have extra material to look at if I've forgotten the background of those factoids. Also in my head at least, it makes more sense to do it this way because in real life when you think about a disease you are going to want to remember as much about it as possible at once and not little factoids about it separately.

Another thing I've just recently started doing is to have the clinical presentation of the disease on the front and the name of the disease and treatment on the back

While I understand the desire to get the big picture, your method does have a big disadvantage in that each card does not force you to recall every single detail. When you get a card about disease X, then you think to yourself 3 key facts about disease X very readily and 1 after a little more effort, and then you flip the card and it has 5 key facts about disease X and 2 less key facts, do you select 'again' 'good' or 'easy'? Any selection creates an inefficiency because it will require recall of the facts you do remember more often than is necessary or it will allow you to forget that 5th fact more easily. You also spend more total time reviewing and trying to come up with the big picture every time than you would if you broke it up. Getting through cards becomes more boring because you can get stuck on one card for like a minute, as opposed to pounding through the cards rapidly.

The solution is to do the following. With the 5 key facts on disease X, you make 5 cards with more specific questions, e.g. what is the neuro symptom seen in X syndrome, what is the drug used to treat disease X. Then on the answer side, you list all five facts or include a visual mnemonic or something to that effect.

This is the way Firecracker works - it asks you a specific question and then shows the answer in the context of the original lesson.

This is the way I make cards now. I learned my lesson from a time when I made cards that required recall of 5 things at once, but it was very difficult/steep at the beginning and became highly inefficient once the cards matured because I'd forget one but not the other four facts and it necessitated relearning all five together.

There can be exceptions to the rule of splitting up lists, such as when you should remember a classic triad of signs/symptoms, but the idea is to keep a high bar for what lists you make into cards.

 

[redblue]

Thank you for the input!

 

[gregoryhouse]

While I understand the desire to get the big picture, your method does have a big disadvantage in that each card does not force you to recall every single detail. When you get a card about disease X, then you think to yourself 3 key facts about disease X very readily and 1 after a little more effort, and then you flip the card and it has 5 key facts about disease X and 2 less key facts, do you select 'again' 'good' or 'easy'? Any selection creates an inefficiency because it will require recall of the facts you do remember more often than is necessary or it will allow you to forget that 5th fact more easily. You also spend more total time reviewing and trying to come up with the big picture every time than you would if you broke it up. Getting through cards becomes more boring because you can get stuck on one card for like a minute, as opposed to pounding through the cards rapidly.

The solution is to do the following. With the 5 key facts on disease X, you make 5 cards with more specific questions, e.g. what is the neuro symptom seen in X syndrome, what is the drug used to treat disease X. Then on the answer side, you list all five facts or include a visual mnemonic or something to that effect.

This is the way Firecracker works - it asks you a specific question and then shows the answer in the context of the original lesson.

This is the way I make cards now. I learned my lesson from a time when I made cards that required recall of 5 things at once, but it was very difficult/steep at the beginning and became highly inefficient once the cards matured because I'd forget one but not the other four facts and it necessitated relearning all five together.

There can be exceptions to the rule of splitting up lists, such as when you should remember a classic triad of signs/symptoms, but the idea is to keep a high bar for what lists you make into cards.

That definitely makes sense. If you don't mind me asking, how many cards do you usually make per week? The main issue I had with splitting up the facts is it led to having about 300 cards per week for each disease, biochem pathway, etc. Its true most of the time you can just fire through them rapid pace, but I always found it hard to look at more than 100 cards in one day, so this meant my cards were building up and I struggled to keep up with it. Where as now I'm making closer to 77 cards per week and I can easily go through all 77 cards in one day, which means I can spend more time on them trying to absorb the material.

I'm definitely still trying to figure out the best way to use anki. Perhaps I just need to learn to be more selective with my anki cards.

 

[chronicidal]

That definitely makes sense. If you don't mind me asking, how many cards do you usually make per week? The main issue I had with splitting up the facts is it led to having about 300 cards per week for each disease, biochem pathway, etc. Its true most of the time you can just fire through them rapid pace, but I always found it hard to look at more than 100 cards in one day, so this meant my cards were building up and I struggled to keep up with it. Where as now I'm making closer to 77 cards per week and I can easily go through all 77 cards in one day, which means I can spend more time on them trying to absorb the material.

I'm definitely still trying to figure out the best way to use anki. Perhaps I just need to learn to be more selective with my anki cards.

Around 2-3 times the amount you're doing. Amounts to about 120 reviews per day.

 

[IncognitoGuy]

While I understand the desire to get the big picture, your method does have a big disadvantage in that each card does not force you to recall every single detail. When you get a card about disease X, then you think to yourself 3 key facts about disease X very readily and 1 after a little more effort, and then you flip the card and it has 5 key facts about disease X and 2 less key facts, do you select 'again' 'good' or 'easy'? Any selection creates an inefficiency because it will require recall of the facts you do remember more often than is necessary or it will allow you to forget that 5th fact more easily. You also spend more total time reviewing and trying to come up with the big picture every time than you would if you broke it up. Getting through cards becomes more boring because you can get stuck on one card for like a minute, as opposed to pounding through the cards rapidly.

The solution is to do the following. With the 5 key facts on disease X, you make 5 cards with more specific questions, e.g. what is the neuro symptom seen in X syndrome, what is the drug used to treat disease X. Then on the answer side, you list all five facts or include a visual mnemonic or something to that effect.

This is the way Firecracker works - it asks you a specific question and then shows the answer in the context of the original lesson.

This is the way I make cards now. I learned my lesson from a time when I made cards that required recall of 5 things at once, but it was very difficult/steep at the beginning and became highly inefficient once the cards matured because I'd forget one but not the other four facts and it necessitated relearning all five together.

There can be exceptions to the rule of splitting up lists, such as when you should remember a classic triad of signs/symptoms, but the idea is to keep a high bar for what lists you make into cards.

I like this. Managing lists of things in Anki is incredibly annoying, and you need to decide if missing one thing from the list is worth an 'Again' or not - thanks for sharing!

OP, if you haven't encountered them yet, you should check out Cloze deletion cards and consider adding them into your studies. Basically, they let you blank out certain parts of text (or hide an image), and "flipping" the card over will reveal what's in the blank.

So, you could combine it with the bigger picture explanation where you have a concept being displayed, but the minutiae is being blanked out. So you can still have your big picture review and revisit things you forget while also reinforcing the minutiae you want to cover.