Does anyone prefer BRS Pathology to RR Pathology?

[AK_MD2BE]

Am I the only one who is not in love with Goljan? Don't get me wrong, his audio is fantastic and he does explain concepts very well. But, his "Rapid Review" is not quite so rapid. It just seems like a lot of it is extraneous information. BRS Pathology seems more succinct and straight forward. Does anybody agree with me?
P.S. Yes, I know RR has great photos, but you can do quite well with a BRS Pathology and looking at the pictures in Robbins.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[TheEleventhReel]

No, you're not the only one. I love Goljan's audio and RR, but I've been turning to BRS some for a real "rapid review". You're right, his RR book is heafty, but I think it really helps me to learn the material as opposed to memorizing the buzzwords that are in BRS. In our path class, it seems we're tested more on buzzwords than on concepts, which is really going to be unfortunate for us when it comes board time. That's why I'm really trying to solidify pathology concepts using Goljan and using BRS as more of a rapid review.

 

[UCLAstudent]

You're definitely not the only one. I have both and am gonna use BRS.

 

[Uberman]

Right there with you on that thought. I've been using both but keep going back to BRS for reference while studying for the boards. Bottom line BRS Path is much easier to navigate through to find what you're looking for. Don't get me wrong...Goljan's RR has some tight tables and pics...and as far as his audio...you gotta have it.

I have to admit...the Goljan frenzy here on SDN is a bit out of control.

 

[DO it right]

I like RR Pathology....Goljan is the master of integration of the material, and you get the pictures from Robbins which is a win-win. I think it also depends on your strength in path, but BRS wouldn't cut it for me.

 

[the POONisher]

I like RR Pathology....Goljan is the master of integration of the material, and you get the pictures from Robbins which is a win-win. I think it also depends on your strength in path, but BRS wouldn't cut it for me.

goljan blows

BRS owns

 

[KNightInBlue]

goljan blows

BRS owns

you know what, you go ahead and stick with BRS

 

[Medikit]

There's definitely not a one book or one method is right for everyone. If you prefer one book over another USE that one, there's no need to bog yourself down.

 

[lotanna]

Please sorry BRS cant hold a candle to Goljan Rapid Review Path, how can you have a Path book with no real pics. Goljan has color pics, some from Robbins even and is more than facts but actual clinical info that u can actually integrate with the other sciences. The questions at the end are even way better than the one in BRS.

 

[UCLAstudent]

Please sorry BRS cant hold a candle to Goljan Rapid Review Path, how can you have a Path book with no real pics. Goljan has color pics, some from Robbins even and is more than facts but actual clinical info that u can actually integrate with the other sciences. The questions at the end are even way better than the one in BRS.

To each his own. I don't think Goljan is a "rapid review" at all. BRS is much more streamlined. I'll use Goljan for the pictures and to elaborate on things not covered sufficiently in BRS, but BRS is going to be my main source.

 

[surprisedgirl]

definitely with you on that one UCLA....i tried RR for several classes and it just would take me so long, i figure i can get a bunch of info from his audio anyway whlie im working out, walking around, etc.

 

[jaide]

the tables in RR r very very gud for cram... but BRS is way better for the overall prep...brs with goljan audio is a potent combo...

 

[AK_MD2BE]

Does anyone else have difficulty with learning/studying from the choppy outline format in RR Path? It seems as if everyone praises the RR Path book so much that everyone retains the information really well with the outline format. I am just wondering if I am all alone in this regard.

 

[blz]

Does anyone else have difficulty with learning/studying from the choppy outline format in RR Path? It seems as if everyone praises the RR Path book so much that everyone retains the information really well with the outline format. I am just wondering if I am all alone in this regard.

There really is no way he could have bypassed the outline format - it is a review book. It's a lot easier to follow if you have a strong background to begin with. That's why some people perfer the even more extreme outline format of BRS Path. I think that if you've got a really strong background you should be using BRS Path and not RR. There is a lot of wasted space in RR explaining concepts that a stronger student would already understand.

To address your problem, I hear that listening to the audio while reading his path book will make it easier.