How to figure out what's high yield and what isn't?

[Arkangeloid]

So this is a problem that I'm running into as we get into Organ Modules. There's a crapton of material presented, but not all of it seems to be testable, or even worth learning. For example, in Cardio, we have stuff about basic phys/pharm/path/etc, but also arcane crap about radiology and clinical correlations that don't seem very useful.

My tutor told me to largely ignore these things, and just condense them into simple associations, focusing on the more important, testable lectures. Is this what you would recommend? How do you guys sort out what's high yield and what isn't?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[notbobtrustme]

err radiology and clinical correlations would be high yield unless your school is completely clueless.

it's tough to get a handle on what's high and low yield, especially this early in the game. in general, minutia is low yield. for example, knowing that inactivating mutations in GTPase-activating proteins is a change from valine to glycine is low yield. however, knowing that such mutations can result in uncontrolled proliferation of cells is high yield.

 

[maxxor]

Are you reading textbooks?

 

[Akali]

I would recommend that you follow the recommendations given to you by 2nd years at your school (preferably the ones at the top of the class if possible). At my school we had access to old exams so that made it easy for us to know what specific areas they would be testing us on. If you're trying to get an idea of what will be relevant for the Step 1 board exam, you can look at First Aid. You could also check out BRS books or whatnot.

 

[DermViser]

So this is a problem that I'm running into as we get into Organ Modules. There's a crapton of material presented, but not all of it seems to be testable, or even worth learning. For example, in Cardio, we have stuff about basic phys/pharm/path/etc, but also arcane crap about radiology and clinical correlations that don't seem very useful.

Uh, no. Just...no.

My guess however, this advice is for PhD professor-specific exams and in this case, probably a good idea to follow that advice.

 

[sinombre]

Get off SDN and learn it all.

 

[boogaloo]

So this is a problem that I'm running into as we get into Organ Modules. There's a crapton of material presented, but not all of it seems to be testable, or even worth learning. For example, in Cardio, we have stuff about basic phys/pharm/path/etc, but also arcane crap about radiology and clinical correlations that don't seem very useful.

My tutor told me to largely ignore these things, and just condense them into simple associations, focusing on the more important, testable lectures. Is this what you would recommend? How do you guys sort out what's high yield and what isn't?

I have found that the people who obsess over the "high-yield" mantra tend to do the worst on exams and on Step I, their excuse throughout the year being that it "wasn't in First Aid, so it must be irrelevant to us." Hint: there is minutiae on Step I, and nobody will care whether the details were in a review book or not. The more you know, the better you'll do. That's the simple truth, but we are always making excuses or trying to find ways around putting in the work. There is no "high-yield." Know everything. Stop getting on SDN daily. Study hard, and do your best. There are no shortcuts--thank God--, and if you fall short, it won't be the end of the world. Dust yourself off, and try again (try again).

 

[maxxor]

I think he's confusing "high yield" for class and for boards. They are two orthogonal concepts.

Think of this as a coordinate plane, where x-axis is class and y-axis is boards.
Quadrant I - HY to class and boards.
II - Just boards
III - Neither
IV - Class only

As an MS1. HY should only pertain to quadrants I and IV. Class is the most important thing here.

I'm a big fan of quality textbooks. The good ones focus on concepts and don't go crazy with minutiae or other things. Have you been studying from textbooks, outlines, lecture notes, or some combination?

I realized in medical school that crowd-sourced / emailed outlines were worthless to me. Even lecture outlines were nearly worthless. I just can't retain anything when I read an outline. I need a story to get a foundation of knowledge, upon which I build nuance and minutiae.

The best study materials for me were excellent textbooks and questions about the material. But, it's not for everyone.

 

[Priapism4tooLong]

So this is a problem that I'm running into as we get into Organ Modules. There's a crapton of material presented, but not all of it seems to be testable, or even worth learning. For example, in Cardio, we have stuff about basic phys/pharm/path/etc, but also arcane crap about radiology and clinical correlations that don't seem very useful.

My tutor told me to largely ignore these things, and just condense them into simple associations, focusing on the more important, testable lectures. Is this what you would recommend? How do you guys sort out what's high yield and what isn't?

Don't worry about high yield/low yield. Radiology and clinical correlations are incredibly important, i'm not sure what you mean by this. For every disease instead of learning it like a list of facts learn it as if the patient is in front of you, how will he look, what will he complain about and what are the major problems facing the patient at that time, long term problems, and diagnostics. Think about it in a logical sense and if you do that high/low yield doesn't matter.

And make sure you link diseases/conditions/systems together. The better the differential you can come up with the better clinician you will be

Material feels like a crap ton if you don't understand it. Get out of a habit of memorizing stuff and start understanding it and medical school will become a lot easier.

 

[Psai]

I think he's confusing "high yield" for class and for boards. They are two orthogonal concepts.

Think of this as a coordinate plane, where x-axis is class and y-axis is boards.
Quadrant I - HY to class and boards.
II - Just boards
III - Neither
IV - Class only

As an MS1. HY should only pertain to quadrants I and IV. Class is the most important thing here.

I'm a big fan of quality textbooks. The good ones focus on concepts and don't go crazy with minutiae or other things. Have you been studying from textbooks, outlines, lecture notes, or some combination?

I realized in medical school that crowd-sourced / emailed outlines were worthless to me. Even lecture outlines were nearly worthless. I just can't retain anything when I read an outline. I need a story to get a foundation of knowledge, upon which I build nuance and minutiae.

The best study materials for me were excellent textbooks and questions about the material. But, it's not for everyone.

Yeah I've read through how the immune system works, kaplan biochem, high yield embryo and kaplan immuno. They really helped a lot with my basic understanding and I wish I went through them earlier. I'm stopping with brs physio and just gonna hit uworld/fa/pathoma like everyone else but I think I really shored up some deficiencies in my knowledge base. For example, I just memorized the dermatomes before but now that I sorta understand how the embryo forms with the limb buds, I have a better idea of where things are and why.

 

[dyspareunia]

So this is a problem that I'm running into as we get into Organ Modules. There's a crapton of material presented, but not all of it seems to be testable, or even worth learning. For example, in Cardio, we have stuff about basic phys/pharm/path/etc, but also arcane crap about radiology and clinical correlations that don't seem very useful.

My tutor told me to largely ignore these things, and just condense them into simple associations, focusing on the more important, testable lectures. Is this what you would recommend? How do you guys sort out what's high yield and what isn't?

If your tutor is a student at your school you should listen to them. Sometimes starting with simple associations is a good first step to actually learning the material well. It's also a good "if all else fails" type thing when it comes to test time. For example, a simple association to make for B.anthracis is animal hides. So if you see a bunch of symptoms in a vignette plus mention of someone who makes drums out of goat skin, then you at least have anthrax on your differential.

 

[Priapism4tooLong]

If your tutor is a student at your school you should listen to them. Sometimes starting with simple associations is a good first step to actually learning the material well. It's also a good "if all else fails" type thing when it comes to test time. For example, a simple association to make for B.anthracis is animal hides. So if you see a bunch of symptoms in a vignette plus mention of someone who makes drums out of goat skin, then you at least have anthrax on your differential.

Sounds like someone is going to dominate step 1

 

[CherryRedDracul]

Sounds like someone is going to dominate step 1

Another good association: "A 35-year-old African-American wom-"



"Sarcoidosis."

 

[Psai]

Another good association: "A 35-year-old African-American wom-"



"Sarcoidosis."

They're wise to that now, I got a 35 year old African American man.

 

[Kahreek]

i hate to tell you this,but given you have a set study source, large part of knowing what is high yield is studying the material and figuring it out as you go.

 

[Kaputt]

Learning what is high yield and what isn't is really what separates the men from the boys. Until you can figure it out, learn as much as you can. As you progress you start to realize what's important and what isn't.