If you could study for Step 1 again, would you use RR Pathology?

[AK_MD2BE]

This post is for all of those who have taken Step 1. I am a soon-to-be second year and would like to buy either BRS Pathology or RR Pathology to study with my coursework (which starts in a few weeks). So, for those who have taken the exam, did you find that the questions were difficult enough to necessitate getting the more thorough, detailed RR Pathology? Or, were the questions more straight forward such that BRS Pathology would have been sufficient? It just seems like the RR Pathology has so much extraneous detail that it may be impossible to remember most of it, thereby making the shorter BRS Pathology a better option. Thanks for the input.
BTW, yes I have read all of the other threads about the pros and cons of both. However, none of those addressed what people would use if they could study for Step 1 again.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[JayneCobb]

So, for those who have taken the exam, did you find that the questions were difficult enough to necessitate getting the more thorough, detailed RR Pathology?

Step one has many 3rd order questions and rarely is straight forward. But either choice will be a good one. I'm biased towards RR but that's just my opinion. But keep in mind, that these are first and foremost REVIEW books. You meed to learn the material first, then you can review it.

 

[DoctorFunk]

You may think that Goljan adds in a lot of extraneous detail but when you carefully read RR (or listen to his lectures along with reading) you find that they are actually cues to prompt mechanistic understanding of the pathological processes--which is what Step 1 path questions are all about. I read BRS Path for my school final and found that while it may have been more concise, the fact that it didn't mention mechanisms made it much more of an exercise in alphabet soup memorization than RR. Just my $.02.

 

[Taus]

You may think that Goljan adds in a lot of extraneous detail but when you carefully read RR (or listen to his lectures along with reading) you find that they are actually cues to prompt mechanistic understanding of the pathological processes--which is what Step 1 path questions are all about. I read BRS Path for my school final and found that while it may have been more concise, the fact that it didn't mention mechanisms made it much more of an exercise in alphabet soup memorization than RR. Just my $.02.

that sums it up perfectly

also...his audio will help streamline whats important and whats sometimes just included for completeness (ie he includes all 3 causes of DUB, but in his audio he says all you really to know is "anovulatory cycles".....or listing a variety of salivary gland tumors when you generally only need to know "mixed tumor")

 

[ginger60]

You may think that Goljan adds in a lot of extraneous detail but when you carefully read RR (or listen to his lectures along with reading) you find that they are actually cues to prompt mechanistic understanding of the pathological processes--which is what Step 1 path questions are all about. I read BRS Path for my school final and found that while it may have been more concise, the fact that it didn't mention mechanisms made it much more of an exercise in alphabet soup memorization than RR. Just my $.02.

Also totally agree. I definitely would have only read Goljan RR in depth if I had to do it over again, and I would have followed along with Goljan during year 2 in his book and lectures (I only listened to his lectures during MS2).

 

[Ashers]

You may think that Goljan adds in a lot of extraneous detail but when you carefully read RR (or listen to his lectures along with reading) you find that they are actually cues to prompt mechanistic understanding of the pathological processes--which is what Step 1 path questions are all about. I read BRS Path for my school final and found that while it may have been more concise, the fact that it didn't mention mechanisms made it much more of an exercise in alphabet soup memorization than RR. Just my $.02.

Yep. Except I didn't listen to the lectures.

For path class, I read Robbins and BRS. For Step 1, I read RR.