FA 2012 or 2013?

[confusedfella]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Hey!

I currently have an older 2011 FA that I have been reading through/annotating with UWORLD for the past semester. Do you think I should purchase the 2012 now, before winter break, and start transferring? Or should I wait until 2013 comes out.

My only worry is that I love having the electronic version of FA ("control + F" feature is golden) and I am not sure when that will be able for 2013. And, the fact that winter beak will be over before the new version comes out.

Please let me know what your opinions are!

thank you🙂

 

[doctoritis]

if u're going to put in a substantial amount of work over winter break it's worth it...

that's at least 2 weeks of time... 1/3 of a dedicated study period!!! but if you're not going to do much then it doesn't matter.

as far as annotating - i assume it's uworld, or something you'd be annotating during your study time anyways ... because there is not that much you should be annotating in it anyway

 

[confusedfella]

i heard that FA 2012 is full of errors and I should wait for 2013-- thoughts?

 

[YourBro]

i heard that FA 2012 is full of errors and I should wait for 2013-- thoughts?

FA12 is riddled with errors, but the authors provide corrections here:

http://www.firstaidteam.com/updates-and-corrections

Before I review a section, I go through and make the corrections. In all likelihood these will be fixed in the new addition, but if they add new material there may be new errors.

$45 is a small price to pay in the context of what you are paying for medical school tuition.

 

[Zzmed]

Guys i need help too.

My exam is in september 2013. I have already started annotating FA 2012 with notes from review books.
Should i purchase the 2013 version and transfer everything into the book or not?
Is there any big difference between each year's version that can cost you in the exam?
I thought just getting the new version and check for anything new and put it into the older version...
(Anyway, i believe that there won't be anything new in 2013 version that cannot be found in qbanks.)

Thoughts?

 

[confusedfella]

Any idea when the electronic version of 2013 along with the errata will be released?

 

[California2000]

my concern is when the errata will come out for 2013. at least for the 2012 edition we know all the mistakes and can correct them. with 2013 edition i don't want to study wrong info. Taking USMLE in June which should I use?

 

[confusedfella]

looks like everyone is in the same boat...ahah

 

[Aclamity]

The test changes every year. FA gets updated every year based on reports from the prior year's test. Why anyone would use an old version of FA is beyond me. it's only $45, just get the new one

Also, annotating heavily before your dedicated study time is just stupid (trust me, speaking from experience). once you get to dedicated study time you'll realize that all the stuff you annotated is (a) already burned into the back of your brain, or (b) irrelevant for the exam. And then you'll be upset that you have no space to annotate from UW

 

[GalenAgas]

The test changes every year. FA gets updated every year based on reports from the prior year's test. Why anyone would use an old version of FA is beyond me. it's only $45, just get the new one

Also, annotating heavily before your dedicated study time is just stupid (trust me, speaking from experience). once you get to dedicated study time you'll realize that all the stuff you annotated is (a) already burned into the back of your brain, or (b) irrelevant for the exam. And then you'll be upset that you have no space to annotate from UW

Have you actually compared FA 2010 vs FA 2012? The content is 98% identical. Anything "missing" should be covered by the 2 question banks you do.

 

[California2000]

If you look at the 2012 errata, the last update was made in July 2012! Hypothetically you can buy the 2013 edition and find out only after you have taken the exam that there were mistakes in the text you studied from. I plan to start using FA heavily after my winter break but really unsure which edition to use.
(On a side note what other study source/textbook requires you to spend hours and hours correcting its mistakes. I spent like 45 minutes correcting mistakes the other day and only got up to page 100. I got frustrated and pushed it off to later)

 

[Aclamity]

Have you actually compared FA 2010 vs FA 2012? The content is 98% identical. Anything "missing" should be covered by the 2 question banks you do.

It's subtle, but there are many random tidbits of difference. At least that was the case when I was comparing 2011 and 2012. The overall content is the same, yes, but the minutiae can differ greatly. it's not much, but that kind of stuff can make the difference between a good score and a great score

 

[confusedfella]

I am thinking that adding the new material from 2013 to 2012 will be easier than waiting for a complete error list for 2013. I am leaning towards getting the 2012 despite what someone else said earlier.

 

[FIREitUP]

first aid 2012 has an error on almost every page, it's ridiculous. i really don't get the appeal of first aid, I honestly think it's a low quality resource with a few good pictures. someone ought to make a first aid variant that sucks less

 

[da Vincis World]

first aid 2012 has an error on almost every page, it's ridiculous. i really don't get the appeal of first aid, I honestly think it's a low quality resource with a few good pictures. someone ought to make a first aid variant that sucks less

So you didn't use First Aid?

Have you taken Step 1?

 

[FIREitUP]

So you didn't use First Aid?

Have you taken Step 1?

i haven't taken the step yet, but i've been using it along with courses and i absolutely hate it. i find that it makes integrations, which is nice, but it is woefully lacking in substance. the pathology sections have basically no explanations for mechanisms. Path is ~50% of the dang test and this book is not nearly sufficient to tackle it. Furthermore, how the hell do you have like 30 editions of a book and have a goddamned error on every page? I'm not talking about stupid misspellings, but egregious errors that say the opposite of the truth. The only reason first aid is used is because no one else has made anything worth its salt. My hope is that some company drives the first aid company out of business, especially since their Qbank sucks ass, too.

 

[da Vincis World]

i haven't taken the step yet, but i've been using it along with courses and i absolutely hate it. i find that it makes integrations, which is nice, but it is woefully lacking in substance. the pathology sections have basically no explanations for mechanisms. Path is ~50% of the dang test and this book is not nearly sufficient to tackle it. Furthermore, how the hell do you have like 30 editions of a book and have a goddamned error on every page? I'm not talking about stupid misspellings, but egregious errors that say the opposite of the truth. The only reason first aid is used is because no one else has made anything worth its salt. My hope is that some company drives the first aid company out of business, especially since their Qbank sucks ass, too.

For someone who hasn't even taken the test, comments like "woefully lacking in substance" sound kind of silly. If you "don't get the appeal", why not ditch it and give step 1 a shot without it.

 

[Zzmed]

I am thinking that adding the new material from 2013 to 2012 will be easier than waiting for a complete error list for 2013. I am leaning towards getting the 2012 despite what someone else said earlier.

Thinking about doing the same thing... Seems the best solution to me. Nothing you 've already annotated will be lost, you won't miss a thing from the new version (i believe approximately 2-5% new stuff) and you won't be anxiously waiting for the complete errata list.

 

[FIREitUP]

For someone who hasn't even taken the test, comments like "woefully lacking in substance" sound kind of silly. If you "don't get the appeal", why not ditch it and give step 1 a shot without it.

This kind of all or nothing attitude is what breeds the complacency that allows first aid to be successful product. Just because I haven't taken the step doesn't mean I lack the ability to identify a garbage product that just happens to be better than other more garbage-y products on the market.

 

[da Vincis World]

This kind of all or nothing attitude is what breeds the complacency that allows first aid to be successful product. Just because I haven't taken the step doesn't mean I lack the ability to identify a garbage product that just happens to be better than other more garbage-y products on the market.

So you're not using it?

 

[MCAT guy]

This question is similar to, "what are the best shoes to work out in!?"

 

[GalenAgas]

It's subtle, but there are many random tidbits of difference. At least that was the case when I was comparing 2011 and 2012. The overall content is the same, yes, but the minutiae can differ greatly. it's not much, but that kind of stuff can make the difference between a good score and a great score

Are you sure the "tidbits" haven't just been moved to another section...

look harder or try comparing the 2010 and 2011 editions which are more similar in organization than the 2011 and 2012

 

[stronghold]

Even the errata has errata. I am pissed 😡
e.g:
(1) In the afferent column for the corneal reflex, within the parentheses, delete
nasociliary branch.
(2) Delete previous erratum that calls for the removal of "nasociliary branch" within the
parentheses of the corneal reflex entry. The nasociliary branch should be included
in the entry, because it carries the afferents from V1. Instead, delete "levator
palpebrae" from the same parentheses.

 

[Aclamity]

Are you sure the "tidbits" haven't just been moved to another section...

look harder or try comparing the 2010 and 2011 editions which are more similar in organization than the 2011 and 2012

I'm sure, but each to his own. I still say why take the chance with FA? just use the most up to date one you can. there's very little risk/cost associated with it

 

[California2000]

I'm sure, but each to his own. I still say why take the chance with FA? just use the most up to date one you can. there's very little risk/cost associated with it

There is risk because the full errata may not come out for months and you may be studying incorrect info. The 2012 we know all the errors.

 

[Jonari]

Is using a 2012 FA bad, if you're taking the exam at the end of January?

 

[MCAT guy]

Is using a 2012 FA bad, if you're taking the exam at the end of January?

Lol. No. Studying hard is good, not studying hard would be bad.

 

[Aclamity]

There is risk because the full errata may not come out for months and you may be studying incorrect info. The 2012 we know all the errors.

No, we don't know all the errors (nor will we ever, there are too many). Also, FA does little in the way of changing their texts after creating their lengthy errata, so don't be surprised when the FA 2013 errata looks exactly like the 2012 errata. That's why they're always so long.

Additionally, you don't need an errata to figure out the errors. MOst of the errors are drop-dead easy to catch. I don't think the errata is the best reason for not getting 2013.

 

[Work]

No, we don't know all the errors (nor will we ever, there are too many). Also, FA does little in the way of changing their texts after creating their lengthy errata, so don't be surprised when the FA 2013 errata looks exactly like the 2012 errata. That's why they're always so long.

Additionally, you don't need an errata to figure out the errors. MOst of the errors are drop-dead easy to catch. I don't think the errata is the best reason for not getting 2013.

i get what you're saying, and i guess it's just a matter of preference. i think it's possible to do well with an older edition of first aid, and that the latest and greatest would only have minor, insignificant changes. also, i wouldn't trust myself to catch every single one of the errors in the new first aid. i'd much rather know about the majority of mistakes that other people have already caught and try to find some on my own as i make my passes through it.

 

[California2000]

No, we don't know all the errors (nor will we ever, there are too many). Also, FA does little in the way of changing their texts after creating their lengthy errata, so don't be surprised when the FA 2013 errata looks exactly like the 2012 errata. That's why they're always so long.

Additionally, you don't need an errata to figure out the errors. MOst of the errors are drop-dead easy to catch. I don't think the errata is the best reason for not getting 2013.

Fair point. I don't know. Ill just have to make a choice and stick with it.

 

[confusedfella]

someone should email the guys who write FA and ask them if all the errors will be corrected in the FA 2013... If it is, they, I think it would be best to get the newest. I am hoping that this is what happens. Do any of you know when the PDF for FA 2013 will become available?

 

[Greenbayslacker]

.

 

[smartparts]

someone should email the guys who write FA and ask them if all the errors will be corrected in the FA 2013... If it is, they, I think it would be best to get the newest. I am hoping that this is what happens. Do any of you know when the PDF for FA 2013 will become available?

Aren't the errors corrected year to year? The 2011 errata look much different than the 2012 errata. I've messaged them about the release date for the first round of errata in the 2013 version (multiple times) and no one has gotten back to me.

 

[Thing1]

Does anyone know whether the Kindle versions are updated for errata?

 

[iheartmints]

edit