Chern Review vs Friedman

[rb10]

What does everyone think about these two, as the concise review manual.

Friedman (http://www.amazon.com/Review-Ophthalmology-Expert-Consult-Online/dp/0721687768/)
- seems to be more bulleted (more like First Aid)
- used more widely
- updated in 2004

Chern Review Manual (http://www.amazon.com/Ophthalmology-Review-Manual-Kenneth-Chern/dp/1608310078/)
- new version out this month
- lacks optics
- more systematic in approach, always including anatomy, physiology, pathology, etc for each disease topic.


If you had to pick one, which would it be?

Thanks everyone!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Visionary]

What does everyone think about these two, as the concise review manual.

Friedman (http://www.amazon.com/Review-Ophthalmology-Expert-Consult-Online/dp/0721687768/)
- seems to be more bulleted (more like First Aid)
- used more widely
- updated in 2004

Chern Review Manual (http://www.amazon.com/Ophthalmology-Review-Manual-Kenneth-Chern/dp/1608310078/)
- new version out this month
- lacks optics
- more systematic in approach, always including anatomy, physiology, pathology, etc for each disease topic.


If you had to pick one, which would it be?

Thanks everyone!

I preferred the layout of Chern. For optics, I think Last Minute Optics is best.

 

[rb10]

Thanks Visionary, I was planning on using that for optics as well.

This is a bit longer, but quite good as well: http://www.amazon.com/Clinical-Optics-Refraction-Optometrists-Dispensing/dp/0750688890/

 

[MstaKing10]

I trust Friedman's since I used it for both OKAPS and boards, it did not fail me for either. I trust Chern's question book, so imagine the review book would be good as well. Last minute optics is great and I really didn't look at the Friedmans for that so not missing much there. Guess you're good with either but the Friedman's in my opinion is really solid so would go with that one based on personal experience.

 

[rb10]

Thanks MstaKing10--

I guess Im just hoping the Cherns Review book covers all the high yield stuff that is in Friedmans. I do prefer its systematic approach however.

 

[WhatNEyeTem]

What does everyone think about these two, as the concise review manual.

Friedman (http://www.amazon.com/Review-Ophthalmology-Expert-Consult-Online/dp/0721687768/)
- seems to be more bulleted (more like First Aid)
- used more widely
- updated in 2004

Chern Review Manual (http://www.amazon.com/Ophthalmology-Review-Manual-Kenneth-Chern/dp/1608310078/)
- new version out this month
- lacks optics
- more systematic in approach, always including anatomy, physiology, pathology, etc for each disease topic.


If you had to pick one, which would it be?

Thanks everyone!

I prefer Friedman's b/c it is a quicker read and has more color photos.

For a question book, Chern was not bad -- much better than the Mass & Ear question book which seemed way too difficult.

Recently, on a recommendation from a colleague, I sampled "Ophthoquestions" (www.ophthoquestions.com) and it seemed the most realistic in terms of testing experience and level of difficulty. It was like Kaplan's Qbank, but for Ophthalmology. They have an interesting feature where they compare you against other residents and fellows.

 

[4424]

I prefer Friedman's b/c it is a quicker read and has more color photos.

For a question book, Chern was not bad -- much better than the Mass & Ear question book which seemed way too difficult.

Recently, on a recommendation from a colleague, I sampled "Ophthoquestions" (www.ophthoquestions.com) and it seemed the most realistic in terms of testing experience and level of difficulty. It was like Kaplan's Qbank, but for Ophthalmology. They have an interesting feature where they compare you against other residents and fellows.

Never knew "ophthoquestions" existed. Seems like a great way to review for the written boards. Thanks for the resource.

 

[90 diopter]

I used both the Chern review book and question book for OKAPs. Did not use any other book other than these two, and I did fine all 3 years. I didn't ever score 90th percentile, but it's OKAPs... they don't count for anything, so I never really put all that much effort into it.

For the real boards if I had only used Chern, I would have failed miserably. I opened up the Friedman for the first time a few months before my written boards, and basically memorized the whole thing. Everything you need to know to pass comfortably is in that book.

 

[mtwop]

Anybody have any updated info on the two? I like the systematic format and seemingly much smaller amount of information in Chern, especially as a pgy-2 with limited study time. However, the post above makes it seem like Chern isn't detailed enough. I'm not looking to score in the top percentiles. Is Chern enough to use as a primary source for Okaps? Thanks!

 

[docta9]

My opinion: Chern is great for OKAPS. Not good enough and too easy for WQE (boards). Friedman is better.

I disagree with the question about picking only one. You can pick one for this forum post. To pass the written boards, I would recommend doing both or at least two sources, like the AAO BCSC series questions after each volume. I did not find AAO Provision too helpful because the questions are way too long.