BRS or Goljan Pathology?

[treasurefull2]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I have been using BRS for a long time now to study for my classes and it has been an excellent learning resource. However, Goljan just came out with the 2nd edition of Rapid Review Pathology for Step 1. I have skimmed through it and it seems excellent, but I am now in a bit of a conundrum

I would really like to switch over to using Goljan's book because everybody knows that's he's the master when it comes to teaching the Boards. His book is VERY similar to his notes and lectures. Plus, the new edition has many pictures (which the BRS does not), which are important, now more than ever.

However, I feel like he might have some minor things missing here and there in his notes that the BRS may or may not. These are VERY minor, but for example, regarding the Multiple Endocrine Neoplasias (MEN I, IIa, IIb), he has nothing on MEN I, and maybe about 10 lines on MEN IIa & IIb. ... Anyway, these are probably, really minor...

What are your opinions? If it's not a major change over, is it worth it?

Thanks alot...

 

[BlondeCookie]

I'm in the same predicament as you except that I already have the BRS book, but it doesn't have any pictures. I was interested in getting Goljan's book, but not sure if I should be spreading myself thin with too many review books.

 

[treasurefull2]

Small correction, Goljan does have MEN I and the syndromes, but they're spread out.

Nonetheless, some more comments:

As far as BRS Path, this may seem really minute, but I really like how they have BOLDED terms. Goljan does not have much bolding, but I'm sure his response would be "everything is important".

As far as Goljan, this book is also more integrative and highly emphasizes pathoPHYSIOLOGy, which the BRS does not do so much of and to the same extent as he does, and this too has also become more emphasized on step 1, and perhaps is a better learning format for the boards.

Still, I am in the middle... Decisions, decisions...