For those who read the textbooks

[tellmemore2020]

How do you incorporate it into your studying routine? Is it more useful for some subjects than others?

I am an M1 and seem to be getting by fine with powerpoints (test grades in the 80's) and read up on things that confuse me. However, I am finding (worrying?) that I am not building a solid base and want to start reading more. I am sure I can benefit from it, but don't know how to find the time.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Psai]

Had the same worry. Bought a bunch of textbooks. Opened some of them once, opened some of them zero times. The only one I used consistently was the anatomy textbook and that was to look at pictures. Just downloaded the pdfs of other books and used those to search topics. I've read a few sections from Harrison's and I like reading uptodate for third year but it takes a ton of time and I doubt they would have helped much for second year. I've found wikipedia to be very useful, but it's not always correct. If there are any discrepancies, it's almost guaranteed that the wikipedia article is wrong. Other good resources are review articles from sources like the New England Journal of Medicine.

Basically trust your school and review the powerpoints as many times as you can. If you don't understand something, email your teachers

 

[alpinism]

Just use powerpoints and review books.

Textbooks as a whole are being used less and less by most med students and residents.

Its a very inefficient way to learn plus many texts contain tons of outdated or inaccurate information.

If you want a solid knowledge base look up the most current research (review articles) in the literature.

 

[razor]

This was my "preview" method that worked GREAT for me. I realize there are more accurate and clinical sources out there, but these are the sources that break the concepts down into simple, manageable chunks that you can add the details on top of later:

I'm going to start w/ a quick plug for Dr. Najeeb's videos. He's like a walking textbook that makes some great clinical correlations and his drawings are money for neuroanatomy, embryo, repro, heme/onc. It's like $99 for an unlimited subscription to his entire library of videos. I've spent more than that on a textbook that I never opened.

Now, books:
3 books that I've read cover-to-cover and don't regret one bit are:
1. Lippincotts Immunology - (1st Year)
2. Lippincotts Biochem - (1st Year)
3. Costanzo Physio- (Along w/ each system throughout 1st / 2nd Year)

I chose these books because they are very basic overviews of the subjects that my school does a very crappy job at teaching. For instance, I read the costanzo chapter for each system at the start of the block (we have an "integrated curriculum" w/out a stand-alone physio class). This book gives you some footing before the lectures and the professors make a whole lot more sense when you know what they are trying to say, but are butchering during lecture.

A 4th book that I selectively use is Golan Pharmacology--another subject our school fails on. It has great summary figures and ties the pharm into the pathophys very well. I generally skim the the tex/figures prior to our pharm lectures and then review it's content of the individual drugs post-lecture. This isn't totally necessary, but I've had several "ah-ha!" moments where the text explains the why or how of a Rx mechanism or side effect etc.

Cardio: Lilly's Pathophys is a must have for book-readers.

Hope this helps.

 

[NontradCA]

For this last CV exam I used Lillys instead of going to lecture. It turned out fine. I wish all blocks had a book like that.

 

[NontradCA]

Just use powerpoints and review books.

Textbooks as a whole are being used less and less by most med students and residents.

Its a very inefficient way to learn plus many texts contain tons of outdated or inaccurate information.

If you want a solid knowledge base look up the most current research (review articles) in the literature.

PPTs may be efficient for memorization but I don't really see them as being conducive to actually learning anything. At least for me.

 

[PL198]

PPTs may be efficient for memorization but I don't really see them as being conducive to actually learning anything. At least for me.

I dont understand that argument at all and it's a common one. It's way easier to "learn" when you focus on the important things and not a trillion useless details.

 

[NontradCA]

I dont understand that argument at all and it's a common one. It's way easier to "learn" when you focus on the important things and not a trillion useless details.

I've observed that ppts can be just as filled with "trillion useless details" as textbooks.

 

[Psai]

powerpoints are a guideline for what to know. you should be able to put it together yourself with outside sources

 

[operaman]

This was my "preview" method that worked GREAT for me. I realize there are more accurate and clinical sources out there, but these are the sources that break the concepts down into simple, manageable chunks that you can add the details on top of later:

I'm going to start w/ a quick plug for Dr. Najeeb's videos. He's like a walking textbook that makes some great clinical correlations and his drawings are money for neuroanatomy, embryo, repro, heme/onc. It's like $99 for an unlimited subscription to his entire library of videos. I've spent more than that on a textbook that I never opened.

Now, books:
3 books that I've read cover-to-cover and don't regret one bit are:
1. Lippincotts Immunology - (1st Year)
2. Lippincotts Biochem - (1st Year)
3. Costanzo Physio- (Along w/ each system throughout 1st / 2nd Year)

I chose these books because they are very basic overviews of the subjects that my school does a very crappy job at teaching. For instance, I read the costanzo chapter for each system at the start of the block (we have an "integrated curriculum" w/out a stand-alone physio class). This book gives you some footing before the lectures and the professors make a whole lot more sense when you know what they are trying to say, but are butchering during lecture.

A 4th book that I selectively use is Golan Pharmacology--another subject our school fails on. It has great summary figures and ties the pharm into the pathophys very well. I generally skim the the tex/figures prior to our pharm lectures and then review it's content of the individual drugs post-lecture. This isn't totally necessary, but I've had several "ah-ha!" moments where the text explains the why or how of a Rx mechanism or side effect etc.

Cardio: Lilly's Pathophys is a must have for book-readers.

Hope this helps.

Wow, your approach is almost identical to mine. The videos and books you list were must haves for me. Only things I might add:

1) BRS physio. Also by costanza. Lines up with text. Lots of practice questions. Great for quick review with the main text.

2) Robbins. The medium one. The bible of path. I read this along with slide and Pathoma all through m2.

3) Kaplan pharm videos with Raymon. Lots of black flag copies of this were floating around the library. Possibly the best pharm discussion I've seen. Brilliant integrations too.

I found a multi source multi modality approach very helpful. It also helps with lingo on step 1 when they will sometimes use terms/descriptions your profs didn't use.

 

[KnuxNole]

Power points were the main(sometimes only) source of notes for me...

 

[Lafakads]

Wow, your approach is almost identical to mine. The videos and books you list were must haves for me. Only things I might add:

1) BRS physio. Also by costanza. Lines up with text. Lots of practice questions. Great for quick review with the main text.

2) Robbins. The medium one. The bible of path. I read this along with slide and Pathoma all through m2.

3) Kaplan pharm videos with Raymon. Lots of black flag copies of this were floating around the library. Possibly the best pharm discussion I've seen. Brilliant integrations too.

I found a multi source multi modality approach very helpful. It also helps with lingo on step 1 when they will sometimes use terms/descriptions your profs didn't use.

I actually agree with multiple sources too, and since I've been doing it I've been getting around the 90s. Basically let say if we are covering Endocrine pathology, I will spend a day on BRS physio for a review. Then another day or two to get thru big robbins (takes me that long to read it for understanding). Then after that I'll either do some Kaplan pharm or watch more pathoma.

At this point I'm probably 16 lectures behind and I just knock them out at 2x speed one day. Its not that hard at 2x since I've already learned the material. Then I use various resources until the test and 2-3 days before the test -> switch back to class notes.

It's different but I've been loving it so far and I feel that I have a good grasp on "understanding" the big picture now.






And to the guy that said najeeb has good embryology videos, are there any specific examples you recommend?

 

[PL198]

take notes from your lectures, buy the highest rated review book for the subject. before exams, study your notes and the review book. profit. literally all you have to do for any class. then find as many questions as you can and do them all

 

[tellmemore2020]

This is helpful, thank you. I don't go to lectures and I don't listen to them, but just piecing together the powerpoints, even though efficient and works fine for tests, makes me lose the narrative thread at times.

This was my "preview" method that worked GREAT for me. I realize there are more accurate and clinical sources out there, but these are the sources that break the concepts down into simple, manageable chunks that you can add the details on top of later:

I'm going to start w/ a quick plug for Dr. Najeeb's videos. He's like a walking textbook that makes some great clinical correlations and his drawings are money for neuroanatomy, embryo, repro, heme/onc. It's like $99 for an unlimited subscription to his entire library of videos. I've spent more than that on a textbook that I never opened.

Now, books:
3 books that I've read cover-to-cover and don't regret one bit are:
1. Lippincotts Immunology - (1st Year)
2. Lippincotts Biochem - (1st Year)
3. Costanzo Physio- (Along w/ each system throughout 1st / 2nd Year)

I chose these books because they are very basic overviews of the subjects that my school does a very crappy job at teaching. For instance, I read the costanzo chapter for each system at the start of the block (we have an "integrated curriculum" w/out a stand-alone physio class). This book gives you some footing before the lectures and the professors make a whole lot more sense when you know what they are trying to say, but are butchering during lecture.

A 4th book that I selectively use is Golan Pharmacology--another subject our school fails on. It has great summary figures and ties the pharm into the pathophys very well. I generally skim the the tex/figures prior to our pharm lectures and then review it's content of the individual drugs post-lecture. This isn't totally necessary, but I've had several "ah-ha!" moments where the text explains the why or how of a Rx mechanism or side effect etc.

Cardio: Lilly's Pathophys is a must have for book-readers.

Hope this helps.

 

[Jabbed]

I find textbook reading to be the most productive once I feel that I have a good handle on the vast majority of the information. Perfect example: Guyton physio. Way too detailed for course work/boards, but I could quickly read through any given organ system in a matter of hours once I'd already learned the bulk of the information through lecture and other sources. For me at least, textbooks are more useful as a final review than they are as first pass material.

The caveat of course is that you're learning far more than you need to know. But if it's in a subject that I think is particularly important or interesting, it's definitely worth it.

Just my two cents.

 

[Psai]

I find textbook reading to be the most productive once I feel that I have a good handle on the vast majority of the information. Perfect example: Guyton physio. Way too detailed for course work/boards, but I could quickly read through any given organ system in a matter of hours once I'd already learned the bulk of the information through lecture and other sources. For me at least, textbooks are more useful as a final review than they are as first pass material.

The caveat of course is that you're learning far more than you need to know. But if it's in a subject that I think is particularly important or interesting, it's definitely worth it.

Just my two cents.

Problem is you don't know what you're going to need to know to help a patient

 

[Jay2910]

Have you guys ever used Vanders Physiology review books for any of the subjects?

 

[Jabbed]

Have you guys ever used Vanders Physiology review books for any of the subjects?

The only Vanders review book that I'm familiar with is renal physiology. It was okay, but costanzo does a fair enough job of covering the topic that I found it superfluous.

 

[W19]

I would fail every single exam if I only used powerpoint, though I usually look at them a day before exams... I have used review books and I watch videos...

 

[Mr. Vandemar]

I would fail every single exam if I only used powerpoint, though I usually look at them a day before exams... I have used review books and I watch videos...

Do your professors just use the powerpoint as an outline, and not include all of the relevant info? If so, I can see how this could be true, and you'd need to take ample notes during lecture or use other sources. Or do they test on things not covered in lecture?

 

[W19]

Do your professors just use the powerpoint as an outline, and not include all of the relevant info? If so, I can see how this could be true, and you'd need to take ample notes during lecture or use other sources. Or do they test on things not covered in lecture?

They sometimes test on things not covered in lecture. Most of the prof are NOT good IMO, so taking notes during lectures would be difficult... and since my school uses mostly NBME exams, I am afraid that pp won't give me all the details I need to know...

 

[razor]

And to the guy that said najeeb has good embryology videos, are there any specific examples you recommend?

His fertilization-->gastrulation were pretty good. That is if his style clicks with you. Some people find him horribly slow and can't stay focused. I however love his building concepts and not memorization, and his drawings stick in my head.

The rest of his embryo is boring and low yield.

 

[chasm-e-baddoor]

I read textbooks but not for all classes. I have read guyton's cover to cover and most chapters more than once, histology a text and atlas twice, and I'm trying to get through Robbins although this one is tough. I also read smaller texts dedicated to subjects like immune system, neuroscience, etc

On top of this I read several chapters from Harrison's , Goodman and gillmans , biochem text, cell and molecular text, genetics, microbiology, clinically oriented anatomy.

Basically this is the way it works for me - instead of looking at the material as a bunch of high yield facts to memorize from ppt of class notes, I sit down and take my time to enjoy it and master it to the extent that it is explored in a medical textbook. If you become a walking storehouse of knowledge of how the body works (physiology, histo) then everything else (clinical /pathologu)merely becomes intuitive extrapolation. I then stream lectures which becomes a review. Professors might also add obscure pearls or facts

As you can see for things like micro genetics cellular and molecular I didn't use texts as much. I used them mainly for learning the foundations (like a primer). The rest of the chapters are full of cellular and molecular level minutiae that are mainly out of the scope of medicine

 

[Psai]

I read textbooks but not for all classes. I have read guyton's cover to cover and most chapters more than once, histology a text and atlas twice, and I'm trying to get through Robbins although this one is tough. I also read smaller texts dedicated to subjects like immune system, neuroscience, etc

On top of this I read several chapters from Harrison's , Goodman and gillmans , biochem text, cell and molecular text, genetics, microbiology, clinically oriented anatomy.

Basically this is the way it works for me - instead of looking at the material as a bunch of high yield facts to memorize from ppt of class notes, I sit down and take my time to enjoy it and master it to the extent that it is explored in a medical textbook. If you become a walking storehouse of knowledge of how the body works (physiology, histo) then everything else (clinical /pathologu)merely becomes intuitive extrapolation. I then stream lectures which becomes a review. Professors might also add obscure pearls or facts

As you can see for things like micro genetics cellular and molecular I didn't use texts as much. I used them mainly for learning the foundations (like a primer). The rest of the chapters are full of cellular and molecular level minutiae that are mainly out of the scope of medicine

Where do you have time for this

 

[chasm-e-baddoor]

Where do you have time for this

Well for one I don't go to classes as my school streams all lectures, which I watch at 1.5x speed. Only have to go to any labs

Otherwise I have plenty of time. Guyton is only 85 chapters and the first 10 or so are pretty basic. Even if you read 1 chapter a day, you can do multiple passes in the 17 months since I've stared med school. Histo book ismedium sized and a good portion is pictures.

Robbins and Goodman and gillmans are on another level and I've pretty much stopped using g&g since there is no time for that massive time (much of it uses small ass print for background info etc). Reading Robbins cover to cover is definitely doable although very daunting. Like someone mentioned earlier it takes a full day to properly read a chapter.

Then there are the smaller books/intro chapters. Which isn't really much at all.

When you think about it - or at least the way I see it - textbooks are probably the fastest way to have information presented. You are reading and it is well explained and well organized .I suppose it makes memorizing things and understanding lectures that much easier since you know what the lecturer/ppt is trying to say.

 

[chasm-e-baddoor]

Problem is you don't know what you're going to need to know to help a patient

This isn't true. Guyton s is a MEDICAL physiology textbook. It s not straight academic physiology that a PhD in physiology would read.

Guytons might be overkill for board(pure) physiology but it should help in tackling pathophys questions

 

[Jabbed]

Well for one I don't go to classes as my school streams all lectures, which I watch at 1.5x speed. Only have to go to any labs

Otherwise I have plenty of time. Guyton is only 85 chapters and the first 10 or so are pretty basic. Even if you read 1 chapter a day, you can do multiple passes in the 17 months since I've stared med school. Histo book ismedium sized and a good portion is pictures.

Robbins and Goodman and gillmans are on another level and I've pretty much stopped using g&g since there is no time for that massive time (much of it uses small ass print for background info etc). Reading Robbins cover to cover is definitely doable although very daunting. Like someone mentioned earlier it takes a full day to properly read a chapter.

Then there are the smaller books/intro chapters. Which isn't really much at all.

When you think about it - or at least the way I see it - textbooks are probably the fastest way to have information presented. You are reading and it is well explained and well organized .I suppose it makes memorizing things and understanding lectures that much easier since you know what the lecturer/ppt is trying to say.

The Guyton 85 day challenge. I only read a few sections, but they were excellent. I'm tempted.

 

[chasm-e-baddoor]

The Guyton 85 day challenge. I only read cardio/neuro and they were excellent. I'm tempted.

Yea the CV portions were the most robust in my opinion and everything else was phenomenal. I would just sit and read and then i realize that the info was cemented into my memory, which really isnt the case for other textbooks.

if i had to name one "weakness" of guytons, it's the relatively weak hematological immunological systems coverage....then again, when i checked other physiology textbooks like boron and bulpaep and costanza, i found even less coverage of those topics

 

[MedWonk]

The only texts I've read cover to cover were Lippincott's Biochem, Costanzo Physiology and Thieme Anatomy text. Nothing heavy duty. We had a big physiology text for our class, but I never opened it up. It was way, way too much, and all the detail we needed to know was already in the slides. In general, I stick to a review book or more abbreviated text to highlight the big points and for practice questions, otherwise no textbooks. I'll consider Robbins because I've heard good things, but I hear it's cray humongous.

 

[wjs010]

I read textbooks for things that I don't think it's enough to just look at slides( I.e things that require concepts) . Mainly for immuno.. IF I have time, I try to pre read , as if I was reading a novel. It's just to pick up concepts so the next day in class, it's even easier to get. After that though, it's pretty much slides sdn whatever diagram stuff I write out. I will never read a damned textbook on a screen. There's something about it I just don't like

 

[Jay2910]

When you guys say Robbins . . .do you mean:
This?
Amazon product ASIN 1455726133
Or this?
Amazon product ASIN 1437717810

 

[Psai]

don't get either of them
save the money for pathoma

 

[Jabbed]

Yea the CV portions were the most robust in my opinion and everything else was phenomenal. I would just sit and read and then i realize that the info was cemented into my memory, which really isnt the case for other textbooks.

if i had to name one "weakness" of guytons, it's the relatively weak hematological immunological systems coverage....then again, when i checked other physiology textbooks like boron and bulpaep and costanza, i found even less coverage of those topics

I finally got around to making a comprehensive pass through guyton (halfway so far), and I have to say that it's well worth it. I'm gaining a whole new appreciation for topics that I felt that I had mastered through costanzo/brs/qbanks, not to mention all the new (and relevant) info. Still, I agree with what others have said in that it would be way too overwhelming and inefficient as first pass material.

I was planning on reading through Robbins next and I was curious if you would recommend pathological basis of disease over basic pathology. Any opinion?

 

[tuffnuts]

Read big Robbins! It takes a long time but it's so well written you forget that it's taken you two hours to read ten pages

 

[CR7MedStudent]

For this last CV exam I used Lillys instead of going to lecture. It turned out fine. I wish all blocks had a book like that.

Lilly is probably the best book, wish they made one for every system.