Ascp Resident Review Course

[star23]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Did anyone out there attend this course this year and if so, was it any good? I am thinking of maybe taking it next year but don't want to bother if it was a waste. Any feedback would be appreciated.

 

[Matte Kudesai]

Did anyone out there attend this course this year and if so, was it any good? I am thinking of maybe taking it next year but don't want to bother if it was a waste. Any feedback would be appreciated.

Heard it is good if you have already studied your heart out...

Osler is more comprehensive. ASCP is decent but a bit superficial. It's probably best for someone who has studied hard core and needs to take a breather and bring it all together.

Osler has greater depth and slightly more amenable to being an actual studying resource.

 

[LADoc00]

iirc, it was held in a remote town outside of Chicago with nothing to do aside from getting trashed at night and was a formula for pure social "shenanigans" among the residents there.

In addition, they actually gave you cash to get messed up if you attended an hour long marketing thing..

 

[CameronFrye]

Did anyone out there attend this course this year and if so, was it any good? I am thinking of maybe taking it next year but don't want to bother if it was a waste. Any feedback would be appreciated.

The ASCP course is very popular among our residents and I've heard nothing but good things about it. We've had fewer people do the Osler course, but they seemed happy with that too.

 

[yaah]

Having been to neither but seen the course materials from both, the ASCP provides better materials to take home (CDs with powerpoint talks), although the Osler questions are helpful.

I would say doing either is probably good, mostly if you want to help focus yourself in studying. You probably don't need to do it though if you are organized.

 

[CameronFrye]

You probably don't need to do it though if you are organized.

Yeah, I think the most important role of the review courses is to provide an emotional crutch.

 

[yaah]

I should add about the Osler questions - they are old. A large portion of the hemepath stuff, in particular, is basically worthless. Even the new ones (like, from recent sessions) are old. Immunostains are treated like a novel technology. They are good for emphasizing gross findings and clinical history pearls though. If I paid all that money for the Osler course I would be cheesed off that the review questions were 10 years old.

 

[Matte Kudesai]

ASCP did not have a question book as far as I know.
Do they?...

 

[yaah]

ASCP did not have a question book as far as I know.
Do they?...

They have questions for each topic, but it varies. Some of them have a lot of questions (dozens) while others have less than 10. They are associated with the handouts for the course, I believe.

 

[Arctic Char]

They have questions for each topic, but it varies. Some of them have a lot of questions (dozens) while others have less than 10. They are associated with the handouts for the course, I believe.

What are popular review texts for the Path boards?

 

[yaah]

What are popular review texts for the Path boards?

The Mais Clinical Compendium is well regarded for CP. AP, I dunno. People use baby Demay for cytopath. Not sure about surg path, there are review books as companions to both Rosai and Sternberg, as well as an Anatomic Pathology Review by Lefkowich (spelled wrong?).

A lot of stuff comes out of Robbins. I was surprised to hear about that. But there are lots of questions on classic diseases and gross pathology. At least, there have been in the past.

 

[Matte Kudesai]

They have questions for each topic, but it varies. Some of them have a lot of questions (dozens) while others have less than 10. They are associated with the handouts for the course, I believe.

I looked at the 2007 disc. It is mostly powerpoint talks. No questions.

Maybe they ask them at the review course. As far as I could see they were not in the materials given to the attendees.

 

[yaah]

The one I saw had a separate folder with "study questions" in it. I thought this was also from 2007. Strange. Maybe it's an add-on option or something.

I just found out you can access the Henry textbook and Robbins online for free at mdconsult. Score!

 

[mcfaddens]

I looked at the 2007 disc. It is mostly powerpoint talks. No questions.

Maybe they ask them at the review course. As far as I could see they were not in the materials given to the attendees.

Yaah is right they are in there. Some are in the lecture themselvs others are in the Study Q&A folder

 

[Matte Kudesai]

Yaah is right they are in there. Some are in the lecture themselvs others are in the Study Q&A folder

Found them....thanks

 

[deschutes]

Was thinking of starting a thread of known errors in path review and even other reference texts.

Was going through Clinical Lab Pearls (Steven Jones) yesterday, and found that the WBC chapter lumped "nodular lymphocyte predominant Hodgkin lymphoma" in with the so-called "classical HL" under the umbrella of "lymphocyte predominant HL". There is no "lymphocyte-rich" category.

I suspect this has something to do with this pocketbook coming out the same year (2001) slightly before the then-new WHO classification...

 

[yaah]

We had a thread about errors in the clinical compendium (well, it was the older version of it, so it becomes less relevant with each passing day).