Goljans Path text book (the stars one)

[Ramoray]

Has anyone had any experieince with the goljan path text, not the review book or the rapid review, but the Stars text taht is about the same size as the constanzo physio book? It seems like it would be a good read for step 1 but i am wondering if it is a good book or not. I mean i am reading robbins during my second year, so would it be ok to transition to goljans during step review or will it be alot diff from robbins? thanks alot!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[dukeblue01]

I actually used Goljan's Stars Pathology along with BRS and thought it was excellent review. I read Robbins during the year, but knew it would be way too much for boards. I highly recommend it if you are hard core about Pathology for the boards.

 

[Idiopathic]

The only external source that Goljan uses to write his books (or at least his only ultimate reference) is Robbins. The two are different books, but really contain the same information. IMHO, Goljan is a hell of a lot easier to read.

 

[Bevo]

Ive got most of his books including the stars book.

its pretty good. I did have issues reading it along with robbins because it didn't feel like it followed robbins very closely and he relied a lot on tables.
I dont learn much from tables myself unless I make it myself. That was my only issue with the book though.

 

[HiddenTruth]

The only external source that Goljan uses to write his books (or at least his only ultimate reference) is Robbins. The two are different books, but really contain the same information. IMHO, Goljan is a hell of a lot easier to read.

which would you recommend: stars or rapid review (that is the latest one i believe)? Or is there any other one that e has out that may be better?

 

[Idiopathic]

RR, just because it is more up to date. It served as our class notes before it was published. Excellent source.

 

[HiddenTruth]

RR, just because it is more up to date. It served as our class notes before it was published. Excellent source.

any less in content than Stars? Thanks for your input on this matter--appreciate it, Idio.

 

[Idiopathic]

Actually, the STARS prose version has more content, but RR is outline form, and it is better than the STARS outline version. Its main benefit is that it is 5 years newer.

 

[hrtsurgeon2b]

Hey Idio,

How close to the real exam were the RR path questions, and how do they hit all the high yield topics on the step1?

 

[Idiopathic]

Close and well. Impossible to nail everything, but this material is pretty darn close. If you are very comfortable with it, the test wont be that bad.

 

[Yogi Bear]

Close and well. Impossible to nail everything, but this material is pretty darn close. If you are very comfortable with it, the test wont be that bad.

hi,

how does the rr book compare to brs? i glimpsed at it at bookstore and it seems like there's less material...but it seemed easier to read through. what's on the cdrom...generic step i cd for all of the rr books...or specifically path? what materials did u use to study for path/umsle? thanks.

 

[HiddenTruth]

i looked at both the RR and the stars. There is considerably less material on the RR than both the stars textbook, and review book. But, the stars seem very dense. Do you think it would be wise to read the stars version if my path is weak or do you think the RR is suffice for step 1? What do you guys think? It just seems as if the stars may be too dense to remember everything and it would take forever to go through. What people have said, is to know a little about something really well than to know it decently with a broader source (in this case RR vs. Stars). I am not sure. I have about 1-1.5 months to devote to just path for review/really learning it. My goal for the test is really high. What do you think, Idio? Appreciate the comments.

HT

 

[Yogi Bear]

i ended up buying a copy of rr. while studying the brs liver chapter and the rr chapter, i find that rr probably has 70% of the info of brs. however, some of the "buzzword" on the red in rr is kinda useful (mostly "most common condition is..."). some of the topics like alcoholic chirrhosis is 1/3 of a page in rr while 1 page in brs. rr has soem pictures, while brs doesn't. based on this, i think i'll stick to brs as my main studying souce and adding notes from rr to it as a supplement.

btw, some online review in amazon.com says that rr path doesn't have pages numbered but it definitely has numbered pages/index.