Glojan pathology difference

[daact]

---

Members do not see this ad.

What is the difference btw. the Rapid review pathology and the Star review pathology by Glojan? WHich one is better?

Thanks

 

[Idiopathic]

RR is better, simply because it is more up-to-date than the Stars book. However, for pure basic knowledge, either will suffice. Some of the material in RR is definitely more current, and I think the book is an easier read.

 

[Pox in a box]

RR is better, simply because it is more up-to-date than the Stars book. However, for pure basic knowledge, either will suffice. Some of the material in RR is definitely more current, and I think the book is an easier read.

Are you saying you read Goljan's RR during your 2nd year pathology course?

 

[OSUdoc08]

Are you saying you read Goljan's RR during your 2nd year pathology course?

I am. The notes for our class IS his 2006 edition of the Rapid Review.

 

[Pox in a box]

I am. The notes for our class IS his 2006 edition of the Rapid Review.

I'm asking Idiopathic.

 

[Idiopathic]

Yes, our class used the notes from his initial RR book, before it was published. Addenda and errata notwithstanding, this material was fine, and I had no need to review pathology before the exam.

 

[Pox in a box]

Yes, our class used the notes from his initial RR book, before it was published. Addenda and errata notwithstanding, this material was fine, and I had no need to review pathology before the exam.

Okay, I was just checking because I knew you were a 4th year and it didn't come out until last year. Hey, have you been using Goljan's stuff for Step 2 prep?

 

[Idiopathic]

Okay, I was just checking because I knew you were a 4th year and it didn't come out until last year. Hey, have you been using Goljan's stuff for Step 2 prep?

I guess indirectly, since I remember so much of what he said "would be on step 2". We have some lectures taped that are online but it seems like a rehashing of pathology, so I havent bothered with it.