Does anyone prefer BRS Pathology to RR Pathology?

[AK_MD2BE]

After reading this forum, it seems that EVERYONE prefers the new RR Pathology by Goljan to BRS Pathology. Why the huge Goljan bias? I have heard that, "he is such an excellent teacher and explains things so well..." The title "Rapid Review" seems to be quite a misnomer after looking at home many pages there are (yes, I know there are a lot of picture and a practice exam...which are counter-balanced by the amazingly small print). Does anyone out there prefer the BRS Pathology, and if so, why? It just seems like the Goljan Pathology book is just too verbose and lengthy for what you need for Step 1, but maybe I am wrong.
Just a guy looking for help to determine which book to buy...Thanks

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[WhoisJohnGalt]

After reading this forum, it seems that EVERYONE prefers the new RR Pathology by Goljan to BRS Pathology. Why the huge Goljan bias? I have heard that, "he is such an excellent teacher and explains things so well..." The title "Rapid Review" seems to be quite a misnomer after looking at home many pages there are (yes, I know there are a lot of picture and a practice exam...which are counter-balanced by the amazingly small print). Does anyone out there prefer the BRS Pathology, and if so, why? It just seems like the Goljan Pathology book is just too verbose and lengthy for what you need for Step 1, but maybe I am wrong.
Just a guy looking for help to determine which book to buy...Thanks

I know this probably isn't what you're looking for, but I own and use them both. BRS Path is shorter, which is good for re-reading 30 minutes before an exam, but RR definitely contains more information, and the format is more engaging-- part of the reason for the small print (which I didn't think was very small) is that there are many blurbs of the highest yield info in the margin to draw your attention to it. It also contains images, which as you noted, has a lot to do with the length. However, since we will be expected to recognize images on Step 1, I find it helpful-- I think owning just BRS Path would be a handicap for the Step unless you had some other source for image review (and no, Robbins doesn't count; do you seriously want to flip through that monster for review??). Anyway, since they're both roughly the same price, and neither is very expensive, I recommend getting both. It never hurts to see something from a different angle, and what's $35-40 in the grand scheme of the enormous debt we're in? Path is the biggest component of Step 1, which is the biggest factor in your residency app, so I wouldn't skimp on it

 

[Skills of House]

After reading this forum, it seems that EVERYONE prefers the new RR Pathology by Goljan to BRS Pathology. Why the huge Goljan bias? I have heard that, "he is such an excellent teacher and explains things so well..." The title "Rapid Review" seems to be quite a misnomer after looking at home many pages there are (yes, I know there are a lot of picture and a practice exam...which are counter-balanced by the amazingly small print). Does anyone out there prefer the BRS Pathology, and if so, why? It just seems like the Goljan Pathology book is just too verbose and lengthy for what you need for Step 1, but maybe I am wrong.
Just a guy looking for help to determine which book to buy...Thanks

I use them both also. My approach to Path is to read Robbins then RR then BRS. The path BRS is not nearly as detailed as the BRS for other subjects so I definitely think it's a mistake to have it as a primary source. And while I am definitely on the Goljan bandwagon, there are some mistakes in his book (see Errors thread) which would make me leery about using that as a sole source also. However, knowing what a monster Robbins is, one third alternative is to use the BRS and or RR in combination with the Robbins Atlas.

 

[EricVorheese]

I use them both also. My approach to Path is to read Robbins then RR then BRS. The path BRS is not nearly as detailed as the BRS for other subjects so I definitely think it's a mistake to have it as a primary source. And while I am definitely on the Goljan bandwagon, there are some mistakes in his book (see Errors thread) which would make me leery about using that as a sole source also. However, knowing what a monster Robbins is, one third alternative is to use the BRS and or RR in combination with the Robbins Atlas.

lol I also use them both! I find they complement each other nicely

OP, the best thing for you to do would be to go to the bookstore, pick up the 2 books, sit for 30 min and read 2 chapters in each book (the same chaps in both of course) and see which style you like better.....


personally, I recommend getting both......

 

[SkylineMD]

I have both and have switched mainly to RR mostly because of the pictures and high yield notes. It's sometimes hard to look at a black/white picture and figure out what is going on in BRS. Even though RR has errors, i'm sure BRS does also. Almost all review books out there can't escape the accidental misinformation printed in.

I wouldn't suggest using it so that it makes following along with the audio any easier because his audio follows the notes he handed out to his review class and the book is in a different order so you spend quite some time flipping through just to get to the various topics. It still however is a great book in my opinion

 

[Pyroclast]

I have both too. Personally I prefer BRS. It's not as complete as RR, but I've only come across two or three practice questions that weren't covered in BRS, and I much prefer the way the information is organized. If I know it backwards and forwards by June, I'll feel pretty comfortable taking the path portions of the boards. But I also like the pictures and the high-yield notes in the margins of RR. As a primary source, RR just seems like too much to actually memorize cover to cover, and I've got a pretty good memory. So, I'd go with both, like everyone else here, but I focus more on BRS. Goljan's lectures, OTOH, are excellent to listen to at the gym.

I forgot to mention, I'm using the 2nd edition of BRS and the newest edition of RR. I think the latest BRS is a lot thinner, so it's not as complete and costs a lot more since it's new.

 

[NEATOMD]

They both do a descent job of holding my desk down, can't say I've really read much of them.