Need Help: Major Contemplation On Which Books

[Downstatedoc]

---

Members do not see this ad.

So I got all the classic board review books:

BRS Physio
golgan path
Clinical MRS
etc etc etc...

I also have the lecture series from kaplan...

My gut feeling is telling me to go with the kaplan books, because i feel that they are more geared to the boards...and in general they are the same format so i should be using those...on the other hand, i feel as if most people are using the first series of different review books that i mentioned...so i am really struggling with what i should use.

Has anyone used the kaplan set and recommend them? Is there anything i should know, thanks.

 

[Ragnarok]

Kaplan LNs are great except pathology.
Biochem & micro are excellent !

Try RR/Goljan for pathology.
Kaplan path does not explain "mechanism", which is important in step1.
behavioral one is ok. I like Fadem BRS, though.
FA is enough for Pharmacology.

GL.

 

[lankysudanese]

Kaplan LNs are great except pathology. Kaplan path does not explain "mechanism", which is important in step1.
behavioral one is ok. I like Fadem BRS, though.
FA is enough for Pharmacology.

GL.

I disagree. Kaplan does a great job with path. I do not understand what "mechanisms" Goljan-followers keep talking about. I never got any mechanism questions on either the NBMEs or Step 1...and I did well on Path.

FA is enough for Pharmacology.

I have to disagree again. My roommate knew FA pharm cold, and still got smoked on pharm on Step 1. He still regrets listening to the "FA is enough for pharm" advice which he was getting from everybody else.
I liked the pharm sections in Kaplan, and thought that they were much more expansive and detailed than FA. My exam was not pharm-heavy, but I'm glad that I prepared for the worst case scenario.

 

[alpha06]

For me, Kaplan LNs are too long and detailed. If you have the time its great.

You are on the right track with:

BRS Physio - a MUST!
golgan path - are you talking about the rapid review series? If so, yes!
Clinical MRS - I am using this source now, but they say the rapid review series of micro is also very good.

And I had a ton of Path mech. on my NBME and it killed me. You have to learn that pathophys. Its crucial.

I didn't notice it soo much on my Step, but I still feel I needed it.

 

[BabyPsychDoc]

Man, when they ask you about HOW THINGS WORK or WHY THEY WORK THIS WAY - this is about mechanisms. You have not noticed all the mechanism qs you haved had on your Step 1 - because I am not buying the idea that you had a test with no mechanism qs.

I disagree. Kaplan does a great job with path. I do not understand what "mechanisms" Goljan-followers keep talking about. I never got any mechanism questions on either the NBMEs or Step 1...and I did well on Path.



I have to disagree again. My roommate knew FA pharm cold, and still got smoked on pharm on Step 1. He still regrets listening to the "FA is enough for pharm" advice which he was getting from everybody else.

And, it is not about KNOWING FA pharm cold. It is about UNDERSTANDING it. You can memorize the entire book, but if you do not understand it fully, it is not going to help. I stand by it: FA is enough for pharm, as long as you understand it and can apply the FA pharm knowledge in solving clinical problems presented as scenarios on Step 1.

 

[lankysudanese]

Man, when they ask you about HOW THINGS WORK or WHY THEY WORK THIS WAY - this is about mechanisms. You have not noticed all the mechanism qs you haved had on your Step 1 - because I am not buying the idea that you had a test with no mechanism qs.

it sounds like "mechanisms" is used as a synonym for "pathophysiology'' which is quite different from pathology. In that case, Kaplan provides detailed and clear explanations of pathophysiology in the pathophysiology sections, so you must have looked in the wrong place.

And, it is not about KNOWING FA pharm cold. It is about UNDERSTANDING it. You can memorize the entire book, but if you do not understand it fully, it is not going to help. I stand by it: FA is enough for pharm, as long as you understand it and can apply the FA pharm knowledge in solving clinical problems presented as scenarios on Step 1.

The friend that I mentioned had an Honors grade in pharmacology (a true achievement at our school) and believe me, his understanding of material for Step 1 (in general) is beyond questioning. If it wasn't for FA's limited drug database and incomplete information regarding the side effects and drug interactions (stuff which you are guaranteed to find in pharm resources such as Kaplan or Lippincott), he would have had a good shot at clearing 270 (judging from his score report).

FA might have sufficed for your pharm needs on Step 1, but please don't extrapolate too much from your personalize experience. I stand by my word: for someone who wants to crush Step 1, it is widely-accepted that FA does NOT provide enough coverage for any subject (Pharm included)

 

[BabyPsychDoc]

it sounds like "mechanisms" is used as a synonym for "pathophysiology'' which is quite different from pathology. In that case, Kaplan provides detailed and clear explanations of pathophysiology in the pathophysiology sections, so you must have looked in the wrong place.
The friend that I mentioned had an Honors grade in pharmacology (a true achievement at our school) and believe me, his understanding of material for Step 1 (in general) is beyond questioning. If it wasn't for FA's limited drug database and incomplete information regarding the side effects and drug interactions (stuff which you are guaranteed to find in pharm resources such as Kaplan or Lippincott), he would have had a good shot at clearing 270 (judging from his score report).

FA might have sufficed for your pharm needs on Step 1, but please don't extrapolate too much from your personalize experience. I stand by my word: for someone who wants to crush Step 1, it is widely-accepted that FA does NOT provide enough coverage for any subject (Pharm included)

Re: pathology. I never bothered with Kaplan. BRS and Goljan have it all.

Re: pharm. Your friend's story is kind of strange. I mean, if you have honours in pharm, why would you have trouble at step 1 in pharm section? And why would you rely on FA for pharm prep if you have honoured in the subject? And, if he was close to 270 (as you are implying), then did he really have trouble in any section?

Also, it is not just my humble opinion: check Best Pharm sources thread: many people back FA up as a good source. Is FA enough to crush step 1? Hell, no. I listed all the darn books I had to buy to supplement it. But, for pharm it IS a good resource, and for my exam it was the best one.

 

[dizzle69]

Re: pathology. I never bothered with Kaplan. BRS and Goljan have it all.

Re: pharm. Your friend's story is kind of strange. I mean, if you have honours in pharm, why would you have trouble at step 1 in pharm section? And why would you rely on FA for pharm prep if you have honoured in the subject? And, if he was close to 270 (as you are implying), then did he really have trouble in any section?

Also, it is not just my humble opinion: check Best Pharm sources thread: many people back FA up as a good source. Is FA enough to crush step 1? Hell, no. I listed all the darn books I had to buy to supplement it. But, for pharm it IS a good resource, and for my exam it was the best one.

I'm simply going to go with the consensus for pharm: FA and Recall.