I had both, ended up using Goljan more. I swear by Goljan. Only minor gripes are that it needs a better index, and the type is really small.DHMO said:For me, Goljan is much, much better than BRS. Goljan offers more explanation, rather than just stating facts. I agree with the above poster that said Robbins review of path is a very good resource.
I felt the exact same way after I bought RR. I got it in the mail and was like, "This is gonna be awesome!" I opened it up, saw that it was outline format (I had read this in the reviews on Amazon and figured it would be fine), and almost wanted to send it back. I held off because I heard from so many people on here that it was the absolute best text to integrate pathology into other subjects and that it can really help for Step 1. I kept it and slowly began integrating it into my studies. For example, when learning about the various pathogens that can cause pneumonia, I didn't necessarily use it as a primary source, but more as an outline as to what was really important and what I should be familiar with for when I begin board studying. One of the things I have found most helpful in the text are his large tables with tons of high-yield (or what I consider high-yield) information. When I learn path, I typically glance over my course notes to get a cursory review of the pathology we are studying. I will then read the sections in Robbins. After that, I'll look at RR path and make sure that I understand the way he presents the material, so that when I go back to review it for boards I can say, "Oh yeah, I remember what he's saying here." Personally, it is not a good primary learning source, but it is an excellent adjunct to your other sources. It has also really helped me with micro because he has so much of that in there.Any tips on how to study from RR path? The outline format just doesn't resonate with me and I'm kind of regretting buying it. Not a very easy read.
Just curious what others have done.