Pathology: books?

[chameleonknight]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hey,

I'm hearing a couple different schools of thought on path. Is it better to study from Big Robbins or a BRS/Lil' Robbins combo? Neither?

Let's hear from the people who have been through this beast already.

 

[opus03]

Hey,

I'm hearing a couple different schools of thought on path. Is it better to study from Big Robbins or a BRS/Lil' Robbins combo? Neither?

Let's hear from the people who have been through this beast already.

I used a combo of all three actually and it worked pretty well for me. If I had the time I read the chapters in big robbins and brs. If I was short on time I would use pocket robbins and make sure to check out the pics in big robbins. Usually went back over brs & syllabi before exams as well.

 

[Hawkeye Kid]

I definitely think big Robbins is a good investment--I've actually referenced it several times since starting clinicals. It has some very well-written chapters that helped me understand stuff that our profs were less-than-effective at teaching. However, I don't necessarily advocate "being a man and reading it." If you have time, it's great, but it's more of a reference/something to read for details. BRS is great for the big picture and for boards, and I definitely recommend using along with whatever else you decide to use. And, if you make notes as you go along, it will be a great help when Step 1 rolls around. It's also good for reviewing just before your unit exams to go over key points.

 

[idq1i]

Studying path from BRS? Heh, only if you want your signature to read LSUSOM-New Orleans, Class of 2009.

Robbins is only the tip of the iceberg. You still need to learn pathophys

 

[DukeDoc08]

Big Robbins ended up being too much...I thought I would be good and read it and be an expert on all things pathology but that didn't happen at all! now I read those purple boxes mostly and if I'm really lost I'll read some of the rest of the text but my friends get everything they need out of little Robbins...
I also bought the question book and I haven't opened it the whole year (I'm still in classes...this sucks! but maybe I'll open it for the the fun!)
I'm sure it is a good investment and hopefully I'll use it a lot, but as far as school...I couldn't keep up with the reading (it's about twice as much for each chapter)

 

[sleepymed]

personally i like big robbins... our path teacher keeps telling us that we shouldn't even be reading "baby" robbins, she keeps telling us... you're going to be doctors, you need to know this stuff... i have big robbins, and baby rubin, but since i read big robbins, i don't have time to read anything else... my one complaint about the big robbins is that there aren't enough pictures... histopath is the bane of my existence and i can't seem to get my hands on anything with a decent amount of pictures...

does anyone else seem to be having problems with the histopath?

 

[yaah]

Robbins is a good book. You can always supplement your learning with images from outside sources like webpath - http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/webpath.html

 

[chameleonknight]

Studying path from BRS? Heh, only if you want your signature to read LSUSOM-New Orleans, Class of 2009.

Robbins is only the tip of the iceberg. You still need to learn pathophys

Well, class notes are my main study material anyway. But the point is taken; Robbins and I are going to be buddies next semester.

 

[Ramoray]

Robbins is really the way to go. it is short on a few items. If you want to learn path and medicine I woul read Robbins and supplement with
harrisons or cecils chapters
-alot of the cardio stuff which is not at all covered in robbins, like heart murmorsk, electrocard.. etc. about half of it is in robbins half isnt
Renal- the first fe chapters in a medicine book about renal failure-acute and chronic and some of thepathophys..maybe 20 percent. 80 percent is in robbins
a chapter or 2 in resp. about diagnosing resp. diseases
Neuro- seizure, migraines, alot of neuro that isnt in robbins. some is.
MSK,autoimmune, all cancers, GI, Endocrine, reproduction(other than a clinical chapter here or there) is all covered as well or better in robbins and in a more concise manner.
Bascially i read big robbins and harrisons both this year and found robbins had most everything, other than like idi said, some stuff in pathophys. So i would reach each robbins chapter and than find the stuff in a medicine book that is not covered in robbins and read those additional chapters. I found i read both and could have saved time if i knew in the end alot of stuff in harrisons is covered better in robbins. But so few epople read harrisons no one told me about it and i had to learn myself. So learn from me. read each big robbins chapter and if it is in robbins.. leave it at that, it is enough. If they dont mention it in robbins, like pathophys, read the chapgters in harrisons/cecils. if you do youll find you have a much better grasp than your classmates and youll atleast konw what you are talking about to a degree on the wards, or so i hope. peace

 

[omarsaleh66]

Hey,

I'm hearing a couple different schools of thought on path. Is it better to study from Big Robbins or a BRS/Lil' Robbins combo? Neither?

Let's hear from the people who have been through this beast already.

I did not own or use Big Robbins or little robbins but I did alot of questions and review books. I think that if u do alot of questions + lecture notes, u wont need big robbins. But if u do use it, it might be good for the pictures or reference.

webpath, robbins review, qbank (path), qbook, Appleton and Lange have some excellent path questions that will help u on the path NBME. Didnt do BSS, but thats a great idea too. start early and dont get behind. Path recall is pretty good too (HY). Goljan questions and pathophys for Boards and wards is good too.

even tho I didnt do robbins but have read like every path review book there is during year 2. So its hard work either way. Personally I know all the High Yield info just seeing it repeatedly in all the review books. U will eventually not forget it.

later

EDIT: listen to goljan audio too, very good.

 

[omarsaleh66]

Robbins is really the way to go. it is short on a few items. If you want to learn path and medicine I woul read Robbins and supplement with
harrisons or cecils chapters
-alot of the cardio stuff which is not at all covered in robbins, like heart murmorsk, electrocard.. etc. about half of it is in robbins half isnt
Renal- the first fe chapters in a medicine book about renal failure-acute and chronic and some of thepathophys..maybe 20 percent. 80 percent is in robbins
a chapter or 2 in resp. about diagnosing resp. diseases
Neuro- seizure, migraines, alot of neuro that isnt in robbins. some is.
MSK,autoimmune, all cancers, GI, Endocrine, reproduction(other than a clinical chapter here or there) is all covered as well or better in robbins and in a more concise manner.
Bascially i read big robbins and harrisons both this year and found robbins had most everything, other than like idi said, some stuff in pathophys. So i would reach each robbins chapter and than find the stuff in a medicine book that is not covered in robbins and read those additional chapters. I found i read both and could have saved time if i knew in the end alot of stuff in harrisons is covered better in robbins. But so few epople read harrisons no one told me about it and i had to learn myself. So learn from me. read each big robbins chapter and if it is in robbins.. leave it at that, it is enough. If they dont mention it in robbins, like pathophys, read the chapgters in harrisons/cecils. if you do youll find you have a much better grasp than your classmates and youll atleast konw what you are talking about to a degree on the wards, or so i hope. peace

I am looking pretty stupid on the wards these days. I really wish I went to that clinical skills class. I have no idea how to do pretty basic exams.

 

[Pox in a box]

READ ROBBINS AS MUCH AS YOU CAN FORCE YOURSELF. If you have any specific questions, PM me. I think it was the best method for learning pathology. Of note, my Step 1 exam was probably 85-90% pathophysiology. The pure pathology was incredibly lacking. Application of the pure pathology with physiological principles (especially endocrine) became the standard by which NBME tried to tease me. Doing many questions does reinforce the knowledge that your eyes may glaze over. Reading big Robbins is no easy task but well-worth it in hindsight. I seemed to have no problems once I started studying for Step 1 with the basic concepts.

 

[Pox in a box]

personally i like big robbins... our path teacher keeps telling us that we shouldn't even be reading "baby" robbins, she keeps telling us...

I agree. Chuck it (Baby Robbins). Reading Baby after Daddy is a complete letdown.

 

[YouDontKnowJack]

big robbins isn't very hard to read. it looks like a lot, but it isn't, cuz you can skip through the crap.
for example, oftentimes you'll read something like "we hypothesize" or "we don't know how" or "further research is needed". This amounts to a lot of pages.... and you can just skip the crap.

So after you mark up your robbins book, you'll see that you really don't have much to read relative to the total 1500 pages.

 

[YouDontKnowJack]

Of note, my Step 1 exam was probably 95-90% pathophysiology.

It sounds like BRS path and robbins are lacking. So what other book did you use? Isn't BRS physio and BRS path a good enough combo?

 

[DOCTORSAIB]

I carry around Big Robbins to look smart and get chics...j/k! At PCOM, we start path during the later end of 1st year. I've been using scribe notes and BRS path extensively. I do well on exams and feel like I have a decent grasp of the material. My only complaint is that BRS path lacks good path slides. The few that exist are in black and white. Nevertheless, I'm planning on memorizing BRS path before Step 1. It really is a good book.

 

[HKDO08]

When you guys are talking about "Big Robbins," are you referring to:

Robbins Pathologic Basis of Disease

Is this the correct review book?
Robbins and Cotran Review of Pathology

Thanks!

 

[YouDontKnowJack]

don't know what robbins is like?

check out a sample chapter for yourself

http://www.robbinspathology.com/content/0721601871/suppfiles/chapter01.pdf

 

[carrigallen]

READ ROBBINS AS MUCH AS YOU CAN FORCE YOURSELF. If you have any specific questions, PM me. I think it was the best method for learning pathology.

I agree 100%. You probably won't have time for all of it, but the investment does pay off. Selectively skim/skip the purple boxes, as the histological details are less important. Pay particular attention to the "clinical course", italised sentences, charts/figures, and the brief review of anatomy made at the beginning of each chapter.

There is also usually a long bunch of paragraphs on genetics - skim this. Obviously, knowing all 10+ of the chromosomal translocations occasionally involved in a lymphoma is not important, but understanding that they usually involve c-myc and the Ig heavy chain IS important, and understanding how this works: what is an oncogene, and that mature B-cells constitutively express the heavy chain gene...hence the cells are CD-20+, hence the cancer may be treated with Rituximab. Robbins is great at synthesizing the genetics, clinical features, and physiology.

In comparison, BRS Pathology is probably not worth using. It is superficial, contains plenty of errors, and seems to include some awfully obscure diseases (ie Kohler's syndrome - necrosis of the navicular bone??) It looks like someone randomly went through the text inserting little "key" icons - some of the least important points have 'keys'. I can't learn pathology from a black & white book..I need colorful diagrams, photos, etc.

I have heard good things about the "Pathophysiology of Disease" book - I didn't buy it though.

FYI - if your school subscribes to MDConsult, you get free access to Robbins Pathology textbook online.