Any value for redoing certain Step 1 practice questions for Step2CK?

[SlaveOfTCMC]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Obviously not to review the extrinsic and intrinsic pathways of apoptosis or what the Lancefield classification for streptococci means...

but to go over some clinical questions from Step 1?


of course not many people decide to shell out the extra bucks to review a Step 1 qbank, but just wondering if people decided to reuse some printed materials for a quick refresher?

 

[Guillemot]

yes im sure some of them are useful. now is it more useful to spend the time trying to filter out the things that are still good, or is it better to just buy step 2 prep stuff....think about it.

 

[MilkmanAl]

I looked at the neurology section of FA to figure out what strokes in certain vessels/lobes do and for all those epidemiology formulas and stuff. I don't see why you couldn't use it for other things.

 

[OveractiveBrain]

Obviously not to review the extrinsic and intrinsic pathways of apoptosis or what the Lancefield classification for streptococci means...

but to go over some clinical questions from Step 1?


of course not many people decide to shell out the extra bucks to review a Step 1 qbank, but just wondering if people decided to reuse some printed materials for a quick refresher?

No. Not worth your time. The questions are totally different. The focus in on clinical, next steps, not pathology. Mechanism is essentially erroneous. If you manage to get one or two questions right, it isn't worth your time or the money. Study the stuff that is designed to score well on the Step, choose the Step 2 materials.

IF you do have the time, do the Kaplan course. THATS how you augment to higher scores. IF you don't have time (and, like most MS4s, you probably do not have time nor want to give it to this exam with rotations and interviews) focus your energy on studying the mainstream stuff you are most likely to see.

 

[Valadi]

Not worth it at all.

 

[SlaveOfTCMC]

of course, I am implying in addition to, not in lieu of.

the diminishing returns may simply be too small to justify the time input right?

 

[Valadi]

Nope. See above.

 

[3boysdad]

Depends how good you did on STEP 1.... >40% of material is same, albeit not same question mind you.

There is a very high correlation between poor scores on STEP 1 and not passing STEP 2.
If you barely passed STEP1... don't ignore that material.

 

[OveractiveBrain]

Nope. See above.

Im going to post this again, just in case you missed it; this time with fonts.

No. Not worth your time. The questions are totally different. The focus in on clinical, next steps, not pathology. Mechanism is essentially erroneous. If you manage to get one or two questions right, it isn't worth your time or the money.

Study the stuff that is designed to score well on the Step, choose the Step 2 materials. ​

IF you do have the time, do the Kaplan course. THATS how you augment to higher scores. IF you don't have time (and, like most MS4s, you probably do not have time nor want to give it to this exam with rotations and interviews) focus your energy on studying the mainstream stuff you are most likely to see.

 

[dozitgetchahi]

Exactly...this reminds me of when some people started recommending that a quick pass of some step 2 books might be good for step 1. Erm, not quite...and I think the theme is the same for this exam. If you get a few more questions right by studying from those sources, I can't imagine it would actually be worth the effort.