Is anyone still using RR Path?

[alternatego]

So, I've managed to do a heavily modified version of Taus, but I'm quite bored of reading RR, especially because just one chapter takes me around half a day of studying.

Do people still think its indispensable?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Belleza156]

I tried to read Goljan during my dedicated study time this summer but it was just too dense. I had already ready 80% of Goljan during the year as we went through the systems. I reread the last 8 chapters in these last few weeks, because I saw on SDN that everyone said if you dont have time to finish Goljan just cover those. And probably tomorrow (day before my exam) as one of my quick review things, I'm going to quickly go through the blue notes on the side. But I don't see how anyone could read Goljan as a 1st time read in less than 2 weeks....and that's w/o doing anything else the whole day.

 

[Phloston]

I own RR Path as well as big Robbin's.

I had read big Robbin's during MS2, and I feel RR Path falls into this category (I've flipped through it but it's definitely a mouth-full). They are both great reference / first-timer texts, but when it comes to actual board prep, you need review materials that are more concise. This isn't to say that RR Path doesn't work for some people for boards prep; everyone has different methods, but when you get close to exam time, I would focus more on the review sources.

 

[Aclamity]

I still think RR path is excellent. People here seem to think Pathoma is a viable alternative, but I feel Pathoma is more complementary to RR. I think it gives a lot of relevant info that's not in FA. Of course, it does go overboard as far as details go, but I think it's best used with course material and then very quickly before boards (the 2nd or 3rd time through is very fast, believe it or not).

Also, there are rumors flying around that Step 1 is going to start having more clinical questions. Personally I noticed a fair amount of Step 2-ish questions on my exam (they could've been experimental), and I feel RR prepped me well for those. Worth a look if you're a budding MS2. I'd pass on it if you have < 3 months to test day.

 

[glykon]

I still think RR path is excellent. People here seem to think Pathoma is a viable alternative, but I feel Pathoma is more complementary to RR. I think it gives a lot of relevant info that's not in FA. Of course, it does go overboard as far as details go, but I think it's best used with course material and then very quickly before boards (the 2nd or 3rd time through is very fast, believe it or not).

Also, there are rumors flying around that Step 1 is going to start having more clinical questions. Personally I noticed a fair amount of Step 2-ish questions on my exam (they could've been experimental), and I feel RR prepped me well for those. Worth a look if you're a budding MS2. I'd pass on it if you have < 3 months to test day.

Totally agree.

 

[Belleza156]

I own RR Path as well as big Robbin's.

I had read big Robbin's during MS2, and I feel RR Path falls into this category (I've flipped through it but it's definitely a mouth-full). They are both great reference / first-timer texts, but when it comes to actual board prep, you need review materials that are more concise. This isn't to say that RR Path doesn't work for some people for boards prep; everyone has different methods, but when you get close to exam time, I would focus more on the review sources.

You're kidding right? How can you put goljan and papa robbins in the same category!!!!

Robbins is the Harrison's of pathology. Goljan is a breath of fresh air....20pages vs 120pages to cover the same concepts....I pick 20!(Goljan)



Sent from my PC36100 using SDN Mobile

 

[Phloston]

Simply put, Robbin's is probably the best text out there in the sense that it elaborates on mechanisms. Everything else seems to just be a summary of it, and I've noticed that when I've read some of the QBank explanations. I can tell they've just gone to Robbin's because sometimes much of what's written sounds a little too familiar.

The only problem is that it is not remotely designed for USMLE prep, so one should be selective when reading it. You don't need to read the minuscule details about all of the different sub-types of gastrointestinal malignancies, but it's solid if you want to know how asthma or pneumothoraces work, for example.

With respect to this thread, I'm already off on a tangent, but I can say that I personally have not used RR Path extensively for my prep. I only bought the book because I was curious based on its great reviews. If you're at the beginning of MS2, I would suggest going through it (or Robbin's), alongside BRS Path, but absolutely don't touch it within the designated boards prep time.

 

[alternatego]

Thing is, I've already read RR once during my 1st pass, but I think now I'll only read those chapters I consider to be the most high yield ones.

Thanks for your input guys!

 

[phoenix89]

Thing is, I've already read RR once during my 1st pass, but I think now I'll only read those chapters I consider to be the most high yield ones.

Thanks for your input guys!

What chapters would you say are the most high-yield ones

 

[Leon22]

i am a ms-2
read robbin before each lecture
and RR path,lecture note after the lecture
this work very well for me

 

[glykon]

Simply put, Robbin's is probably the best text out there in the sense that it elaborates on mechanisms. Everything else seems to just be a summary of it, and I've noticed that when I've read some of the QBank explanations. I can tell they've just gone to Robbin's because sometimes much of what's written sounds a little too familiar.

The only problem is that it is not remotely designed for USMLE prep, so one should be selective when reading it. You don't need to read the minuscule details about all of the different sub-types of gastrointestinal malignancies, but it's solid if you want to know how asthma or pneumothoraces work, for example.

With respect to this thread, I'm already off on a tangent, but I can say that I personally have not used RR Path extensively for my prep. I only bought the book because I was curious based on its great reviews. If you're at the beginning of MS2, I would suggest going through it (or Robbin's), alongside BRS Path, but absolutely don't touch it within the designated boards prep time.

Just curious, what is your percentile on UW for Path/Pathophys? Pls be honest.

 

[Phloston]

Just curious, what is your percentile on UW for Path/Pathophys? Pls be honest.

I haven't started UWorld yet. I'm looking to do that next month.

 

[DJtiesto]

edit

 

[djsg9]

A bunch of people in the year above me pledged their allegiance to RR. They did well all around. During MS2, I just couldn't do it. The audios are time consuming and the book itself was just so DENSE. I stuck to BRS Patho. It worked well for me, a great companion to 'Papa Robbins' and FA.

However, now I'm neck deep in board review and RR is just unparalleled. If I get a patho question on UW that isn't in FA (or where it should be in FA), RR doesn't fail! I find it best to review it fast after doing a bunch of UW questions; good system recap plus now you can really remember the 'obscure' details because you came across them once in UW.

So yeah- great review! If you find yourself tripping over it or spending a great deal of time reading RR, go back to FA and get your basic outline down in your head. It's easy to dive into RR and never come back... dense and scary. Have a plan.

 

[DJtiesto]

A bunch of people in the year above me pledged their allegiance to RR. They did well all around. During MS2, I just couldn't do it. The audios are time consuming and the book itself was just so DENSE. I stuck to BRS Patho. It worked well for me, a great companion to 'Papa Robbins' and FA.

However, now I'm neck deep in board review and RR is just unparalleled. If I get a patho question on UW that isn't in FA (or where it should be in FA), RR doesn't fail! I find it best to review it fast after doing a bunch of UW questions; good system recap plus now you can really remember the 'obscure' details because you came across them once in UW.

So yeah- great review! If you find yourself tripping over it or spending a great deal of time reading RR, go back to FA and get your basic outline down in your head. It's easy to dive into RR and never come back... dense and scary. Have a plan.

thanks for the advice!

 

[Jonari]

I own RR Path as well as big Robbin's.

I had read big Robbin's during MS2, and I feel RR Path falls into this category (I've flipped through it but it's definitely a mouth-full). They are both great reference / first-timer texts, but when it comes to actual board prep, you need review materials that are more concise. This isn't to say that RR Path doesn't work for some people for boards prep; everyone has different methods, but when you get close to exam time, I would focus more on the review sources.

Yikes, so I'm guessing you probably wouldn't even consider using Pathoma, correct?

 

[djsg9]

Yikes, so I'm guessing you probably wouldn't even consider using Pathoma, correct?

I can't comment on Pathoma because I never used it. One factor was because I didn't want to pay for another program when I already have a mountain of BRS, Kaplan, HY books, etc. Also, videos don't seem to be so great for me (although the Kaplan Step 2's are actually pretty fun). I'm a listener and a doer and having to sit through Step 1 vid lectures makes me sleepy...

It all boils down to what's good for YOU though. SD is filled with what's the best resource for x subject, but you also gotta factor in what you're strong in, stuff that wasn't emphasized on in school, and your learning style. If you like it and it works, then awesome! Personally at this point, I don't have 10 days for Patho (they say you can finish Pathoma in 10 days). I'm on semester break for 2 weeks so I'm doing 2-3 organ systems/subjects per day and using the last 4 days for a power review with an explosion of questions. Taking Step 1 in December.

 

[RichieVallens]

straight up gunner