For those who already took Step 1: Any Weak Areas in UsmleWorld?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

wcec

mango-eater
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
I've searched on SDN and read from other posters that UW is weak in molecular bio and preventive medicine. It'd be great to know from those who already took Step 1 if there are other areas for which I should turn to other sources.

If you have advice on good sources for UW's weak areas, that'd be awesome too. Thanks a lot & have a great 4th of July!
 
i thought it was weak in the way that it did not have as much variation as the real thing. once i got used to the type of thinking UW wanted, it became much easier to answer questions. even though content from ? to ? would change, the way in which you needed to think about the info would be similar. the real thing had more variation in questions...
 
Thanks, Helo. i can see what you mean, having finished about half of UW. On the flip side, are there any topics in UW that are overkill and, in the interest of saving time, I should use other sources to cover (like Kaplan QBank or Usmle Rx)?
 
I thought it was weak in behavioral science for sure...it had all kinds of weird biases and some of the calculations and "what type of study is this?" questions were not all that great..and there was a LOT of behavioral science on my exam. I don't remember ever getting any hardy weinberg questions on WORLD but definitely had one on my step 1...I could've just forgotten though. But overall I think WORLD was much more difficult than the real deal and I think it prepared me pretty well (i guess we'll see in 2 weeks). But i definitely had very similar questions on my exam that I knew I had seen before...one question even had the same exact picture as on WORLD.
 
No weaknesses that I noticed, but really you should not be counting on USMLE World as a comprehensive source of information. That is what your review books are for.
 
altho review sources are pretty comprehensive, there may be concepts on your exam not covered by the review books. i know that this was the case with neuroanatomy for me...overall tho, your prep with a question bank, review books, and your knowledge from yr 1 and 2 of med school will really help.
 
USMLE requires more skill in clinical diagnoses. UWorld gives too many clues for each condition or pathology... i.e., for a heart murmur world is going to tell you exactly where it is loudest, on inspiration or expiration, exactly when in the cycle the murmur is heard, describe it to you along with any snaps or clicks, etc.

On Step 1, they might just tell you that a guy was playing ball and fainted, had a systolic murmur in the left chest area that is worse when he raises his legs when lying on his back, or something like that. i.e., you're expected to be able to work from a few less specific clues to a "most likely" diagnosis, instead of work from a host of very specific clues to a "has to be this, without a doubt" diagnosis that you see in world. This applies for everything... murmurs, back pains, coughs and dyspneas, headaches, etc. You need to know clinical medicine at a pretty thorough level (for a second year student) to quickly get to the "most likely" cause of the presentation described. It wasn't always clear cut.

World makes the diagnosis easy, and the second or third steps to answer the question very difficult. I felt like the USMLE made the diagnosis a bit trickier, but once I was confident of that getting to the correct answer was much more straight forward.
 
USMLE requires more skill in clinical diagnoses. UWorld gives too many clues for each condition or pathology... i.e., for a heart murmur world is going to tell you exactly where it is loudest, on inspiration or expiration, exactly when in the cycle the murmur is heard, describe it to you along with any snaps or clicks, etc.

On Step 1, they might just tell you that a guy was playing ball and fainted, had a systolic murmur in the left chest area that is worse when he raises his legs when lying on his back, or something like that. i.e., you're expected to be able to work from a few less specific clues to a "most likely" diagnosis, instead of work from a host of very specific clues to a "has to be this, without a doubt" diagnosis that you see in world. This applies for everything... murmurs, back pains, coughs and dyspneas, headaches, etc. You need to know clinical medicine at a pretty thorough level (for a second year student) to quickly get to the "most likely" cause of the presentation described. It wasn't always clear cut.

World makes the diagnosis easy, and the second or third steps to answer the question very difficult. I felt like the USMLE made the diagnosis a bit trickier, but once I was confident of that getting to the correct answer was much more straight forward.
umm,, that's really not good then.

yet people still swear by UW.

😕


I guess the pros out-weigh the cons.
 
USMLE requires more skill in clinical diagnoses. UWorld gives too many clues for each condition or pathology... i.e., for a heart murmur world is going to tell you exactly where it is loudest, on inspiration or expiration, exactly when in the cycle the murmur is heard, describe it to you along with any snaps or clicks, etc.

On Step 1, they might just tell you that a guy was playing ball and fainted, had a systolic murmur in the left chest area that is worse when he raises his legs when lying on his back, or something like that. i.e., you're expected to be able to work from a few less specific clues to a "most likely" diagnosis, instead of work from a host of very specific clues to a "has to be this, without a doubt" diagnosis that you see in world. This applies for everything... murmurs, back pains, coughs and dyspneas, headaches, etc. You need to know clinical medicine at a pretty thorough level (for a second year student) to quickly get to the "most likely" cause of the presentation described. It wasn't always clear cut.

World makes the diagnosis easy, and the second or third steps to answer the question very difficult. I felt like the USMLE made the diagnosis a bit trickier, but once I was confident of that getting to the correct answer was much more straight forward.

Yeah. With UW it was frustrating b/c I would know the disease but wouldnt know the second or third step. If found on the NBMEs (and maybe the real thing, we'll see) the extra steps werent the challenge it was more about figuring out the disease.

That said I think UW was a pretty good question bank.
 
I agree that UWorld was the best question resource I found... but it isn't perfect, and this thread seems to be asking specifically for where it isn't perfect. Of course it can't hope to cover every topic, detail, and possible question you'll see. But I think the main weakness in "style" of question vs. the real thing is as I stated above... at least I thought so.

Not sure exactly how to address that problem though. FA certainly doesn't, nor does any typical (and oft recommended here) board review book. If your school wasn't strong on clinical integration the test might prove especially difficult. Reading something like FA for the wards, or going through an internal medicine review book might help. Harrison's would have been golden, but really... who has that kind of time, and who really shoots for getting every question correct?
 
Thanks, osli! That's great info. You're right -- although UW is the best question bank, it's been helpful to know the areas in UW that i should try to supplement with other resources.

i do have a book fr my 2nd yr clinical course called
"Textbook of Physical Diagnosis: History and Examination" by Mark Swartz -- might this be a good resource? Thus far, i've used it mainly for the tons of amazing photographs, and what little i've read has been clear & concise.
 
I don't know if this will be helpful (haven't taken the real exam yet), but I'm using pocket Bates for q's with phys dx findings(like tables, lung sounds and what they mean in pathology, etc), and Maxwell's pocket "book" too (has some good info like a dermatome map, stuff about nerves & DTR's, nerve injuries & muscles, some acid-base things too).

I also flipped through some pages of "Boards & Wards", has some relevant info (it's for step 2 &3 I think)
 
Last edited:
Top