FINALLY, a rational post.predodoc said:I recently decided I would compare the photocopied notes and the rapid review book. What I did was take one chapter and just see how they overlapped. I found that they had 99% of the same material. The book is better organized and is easier to read. It has Two tone coloring making it easier to read and the spacing is better. It seems like the he tries to condense the things in is RR book. For example, if he was listing things that cause some abnormal physiological condition, the photocopy notes might have all the same info but it might be spread out in different places throughout that particular page and not lumped all together as well. The book would have it more in order like : #1cause .#2 cause .ect.( more BRSish). Overall there is not too much difference except the book is easier to read and flows better. You will probably get the same info out of both though. Personally I wish the new book would come out now and not in like 3 months since Ill have to use photocopy notes in general path until it does.
RR Path 2004.JBHunt said:What are we comparing here? He has several Rapid Review series.
Are we comparing his RR Path (2004) or
RR usmle step 1 (2001)
UNM2009 said:That really sucks seeing as how I just bought RR path 2004