Comlex Review
Started by mcandy
mcandy said:
I haven't taken the exam yet but based on my research, yes it's definitely adequate for the OMM section of COMLEX-I.
Be aware that there is a new book out called "COMLEX Review, Clinical Anatomy and OMM" (I think). It's written by these 2 DO/MBA 4th years at NYCOM. It follows the Q/A format, which I find helpful. Seems like a good book but I'm sticking to Saverese. It's still the gold-standard for OMM. G'luck
Focus on the autonomics and viscerosomatic reflexes, and skim through diagnosis and treatment. The actualy mechanical aspect of OMT really wasnt a big player on my COMLEX I, while the other stuff was hit hard.
Reverse that for Step II though. Cranial was huge, no viscerosomatic stuff, etc.
Reverse that for Step II though. Cranial was huge, no viscerosomatic stuff, etc.
Speaking of COMLEX - I thought I saw some of last year's MS-2 class studying with what looked like a Kaplan series written for COMLEX review. Does this exist??? I can't seem to find it. Is it any good?
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
No. The kaplan book stinks and the Saverse book didn't cover it well. A lot of people will say know your autonomics, which is true. But on my exam (10/05) they made up about 1 out of every 10 OMM questions. The rest were things that you just hope to remember from class. I read the Saverse book the day before the Comlex and think it may have got me 2 extra questions. Thats my take on it anyways.
Did the Kaplan series of books stink in general or just for OMM??? I wasn't planning on using them for OMM review anyway, but I was considering them if they were good for an overall COMLEX review.
Any comprehensive review book is okay for COMLEX. They ask you the same stuff, just worded much differently.
avanb803 said:
Do you think that had anything to do with it? I know Saverese is easy read but putting one day into a section that covers 10-20% of a national board exam doesn't seem like the best strategy in my mind. I may be wrong.
