BRS Path vs Goljan RR

[the_equalizer]

I know this question may have come up before, but hopefully now after some have actually taken the boards the opinions will be more substantiated. What do you all think? I tried comparing the books and they really didn't feel the same, the way they treat certain topics differs, and the facts that they choose to list for each disease (or other heading) are not always the same.
I know some of Goljan's students are on this site, so please point that out if you contribute an opinion. Thanks for your help everyone, hopefully this post will be of use to all those who will contemplate this question in the coming months.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Idiopathic]

He told me that whoever used to edit BRS was now with their group on the RR series. I think his book is fantastic, personally, at least as good (in its initial release) as BRS path ever was.

 

[hans19]

I used Goljans STARS path review which I found to be excellent. It had a more integrated 'systems' based approach, and I found it to be more relavent than BRS (1st edition. I understand a 2nd edition is out now). I owned both, but in the end I like the STARS better. I am in residency now and I still look stuff up in Goljan for a quick review. I have also heard a lot of great things about Path review in the Boards and Wards series.

Take a look at BRS, STARS and Boards and Wards. Find out which format you happen to like the best then buy ONE, and stick to it.

Best of luck
-Hans