Pathology Shelf Exam 2011

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

DrMetal

To shred or not shred?
Lifetime Donor
15+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2008
Messages
3,007
Reaction score
2,487
Anyone taken the Pathology Shelf Exam recently? Can you offer some kind words of guidance???

Am planning on studying from Goljan RR, and Robbins, then doing questions from the Goljan QBank (I have Uworld too, but would rather save those for the big dance). Any thoughts on this study technique?

Much thanks. . .

Members don't see this ad.
 
Just finished this shelf and the pharm- overall I thought the questions were alright. There were plenty that were straight forward and then ones that I had never even heard of before. We only had 1.5 days to study so I didn't go through all of RR or FA even. Most of our class barely had enough time so watch your timing. Also I think we had lot more cellular/molecular questions than I would have expected and I had at least 10 questions (out of 125) on vitamins.
 
Took the beast this morning, was pretty hard. Our version seemed to defy everything we've talked about here, booo!

  • First, there were plenty of "one-word" associations. These really are worth memorizing. Now, of course, I agree with the comment above that you should have a more global, clinical picture of the situation (and this is definitely true in real life). But, I'm telling you, there were plenty of one-worders. You just gotta know them, otherwise you feel like a real tool.
  • Our version did not seem to emphasize Chapter-1-thru-10 Robbins stuff (the basic, molecular, genetics path). Of course, there was some of that and it shouldn't be neglected. But our test had a significant amount of bone/muskuloskeletal/derm questions!
  • There were 10-15 images, and you really had to know what was going on in the image. You could not answer the question simply by reading the questions stem, even if you understood everything discussed in the stem. You really had to "see" and comprehend some factoid in the image.
  • About 50% of the questions were long, clinical oriented. The other 50% were more straightforward (first-orderish). You better get all of the latter correct, b/c the clinical oriented are hard! (just reading them, and keeping all of the info in your head, given time constraints).
  • Test was long, finished with 1 minute to spare, and no opportunity to re-look at anything.
Good luck fellas, you're gonna need it on this one (at least the version we got) . . . hopefully the nbme gods will treat you better.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Took the beast this morning, was pretty hard. Our version seemed to defy everything we've talked about here, booo!

  • First, there were plenty of "one-word" associations. These really are worth memorizing. Now, of course, I agree with the comment above that you should have a more global, clinical picture of the situation (and this is definitely true in real life). But, I'm telling you, there were plenty of one-worders. You just gotta know them, otherwise you feel like a real tool.
  • Our version did not seem to emphasize Chapter-1-thru-10 Robbins stuff (the basic, molecular, genetics path). Of course, there was some of that and it shouldn't be neglected. But our test had a significant amount of bone/muskuloskeletal/derm questions!
  • There were 10-15 images, and you really had to know what was going on in the image. You could not answer the question simply by reading the questions stem, even if you understood everything discussed in the stem. You really had to "see" and comprehend some factoid in the image.
  • About 50% of the questions were long, clinical oriented. The other 50% were more straightforward (first-orderish). You better get all of the latter correct, b/c the clinical oriented are hard! (just reading them, and keeping all of the info in your head, given time constraints).
  • Test was long, finished with 1 minute to spare, and no opportunity to re-look at anything.
Good luck fellas, you're gonna need it on this one (at least the version we got) . . . hopefully the nbme gods will treat you better.

I also took the exam today. It was more difficult than I was expecting. I am usually a very fast test taker, but with this exam I only finished with 9 minutes to spare. Overall:

- Goljan RR and audio were very helpful. I went through RR twice throughout the year and went over select chapters for this shelf.
- BRS path was... less helpful. I went through BRS path two to three times throughout the year and once more in the week before the shelf. It's good as a quick way to jog your memory about something you recently memorized, but not much more than that.
- UWorld questions were good, but for some reason this test just felt different.

If I had to go back and do it again I would not go through BRS and would have just focused on RR and questions.
 
Just finished this shelf and the pharm- overall I thought the questions were alright. There were plenty that were straight forward and then ones that I had never even heard of before. We only had 1.5 days to study so I didn't go through all of RR or FA even. Most of our class barely had enough time so watch your timing. Also I think we had lot more cellular/molecular questions than I would have expected and I had at least 10 questions (out of 125) on vitamins.

Agree about the molecular. Also Micro. We took our Path one before the Micro one so I hadn't reviewed all my micro yet, which definitely would have been helpful as well.
 
Took the beast this morning, was pretty hard. Our version seemed to defy everything we've talked about here, booo!

  • First, there were plenty of "one-word" associations. These really are worth memorizing. Now, of course, I agree with the comment above that you should have a more global, clinical picture of the situation (and this is definitely true in real life). But, I'm telling you, there were plenty of one-worders. You just gotta know them, otherwise you feel like a real tool.
  • Our version did not seem to emphasize Chapter-1-thru-10 Robbins stuff (the basic, molecular, genetics path). Of course, there was some of that and it shouldn't be neglected. But our test had a significant amount of bone/muskuloskeletal/derm questions!
  • There were 10-15 images, and you really had to know what was going on in the image. You could not answer the question simply by reading the questions stem, even if you understood everything discussed in the stem. You really had to "see" and comprehend some factoid in the image.
  • About 50% of the questions were long, clinical oriented. The other 50% were more straightforward (first-orderish). You better get all of the latter correct, b/c the clinical oriented are hard! (just reading them, and keeping all of the info in your head, given time constraints).
  • Test was long, finished with 1 minute to spare, and no opportunity to re-look at anything.
Good luck fellas, you're gonna need it on this one (at least the version we got) . . . hopefully the nbme gods will treat you better.

I just took it as well. I completely agree with the above. I was mostly thrown by the questions were you had to know what was going on in the image. I'm used to getting some clue from the stem! Nada on this exam you just had to flat out know. Definitely rougher than I expected since path has been my best subject this year. I also recently took the micro/immuno exam with micro not being the strongest subject for me and it was cake. Much, much easier. Go figure.
 
Took miniboard for path today....

It's as everyone says with one caveats.....the pictures are straightforward. Yeah, you have to know them, but you should get them if you have done your due diligence during the year with the path slides. So don't bother going over slides.

My 2 cents otherwise. This test is all about association. If you have been keeping up with your goljian, listening to his audio, and using it throughout the year, you will pass the exam no problem (without even studying for it really). If you have a week "off" meaning dedicated time to study for this exam (even with other exams), go through all of Goljian, look at every table, look at every picture, and read every blue side note. Follow that up with Path FA x2 if you have time. If not skip Goljian, and just do the Path FA x2. If you are doing World (I had done the path portions of UWorld x2), it will help but I wouldn't necessarily use it as the sole source of studying for this exam. The vignettes are not hard to nail down based on pathology. The details are the most important thing. FA will help more.

I felt that the disease state / or pathology was obvious in most cases and the difficulty is the 2nd or 3rd or detail associated with that disease that will get. Know all the associations and you will do amazing.

One final thing....if you are just looking to pass....I felt that doing FA as much possible with as much supplementation with UWorld will get you there. You shouldn't need massive amounts of prep time to pass. To do well however, I think you have to Goljian as everyone says pretty cold.
 
Last edited:
I just took it as well. I completely agree with the above. I was mostly thrown by the questions were you had to know what was going on in the image. I'm used to getting some clue from the stem! Nada on this exam you just had to flat out know. Definitely rougher than I expected since path has been my best subject this year. I also recently took the micro/immuno exam with micro not being the strongest subject for me and it was cake. Much, much easier. Go figure.

I finished the Path NBME in 1:55 (they gave us 2:30 for 125 questions). I didn't feel short on time.
 
I finished the Path NBME in 1:55 (they gave us 2:30 for 125 questions). I didn't feel short on time.

We just got our scores back for our NBME's... Ours don't count for grades, so there was no "focused studying" for any of it. Interesting low scores there!I now some of my classmates read CMMRS and First aid before the MI test. Is there some nbme site that allows you to do conversions to predicted scores off these numbers?

Path: 630, mean 478, SD 91

Pharm: 530, mean 401, SD 103

Micro/immuno: 650, mean 445, SD 122

Micro only: 600, mean 455, SD 106

Low scores were...
Path: 280
Pharm: 60
Micro/immuno: 130
Micro only: 170

High scores:
Path: 780
Pharm: 750
M/I: 920
Micro only: 870
 
I think the only NBME Shelf which I remember feeling like I failed was the Physiology one. That seems to be the consensus for most people though.
 
I got 690 on path and 680 on micro.

All I did for path was RR, more so the book than the audio.

For micro I read high yield.

Those are the best books in my opinion.
 
do you know if 83 is the 2 digit score that NBME correlates to 500 or is this something that only her school does. im asking b/c i've heard of NBME making 500 like a 70ish for other exams. if that's the case, then it's really generous of NBME to do so.
 
do you know if 83 is the 2 digit score that NBME correlates to 500 or is this something that only her school does. im asking b/c i've heard of NBME making 500 like a 70ish for other exams. if that's the case, then it's really generous of NBME to do so.

I believe that by definition a 500 is the 50th percentile...
 
Screenshot2011-05-16at61654PM.png



Here's the pathology one, if you took a paper version of it.
 
This is what I did last year for my Pathology shelf (it's kind of weird because I had bought stuff for step 1 at the same time), what I did was a bit excessive but worked, I ended up scoring 850.

I listened to Goljan Audio and basically read along in Rapid Review Pathology for the relevant chapters, I did this over about 2 weeks. I did not read the chapters he did not do audio for.

I read First Aid's Path section and then the Path section of each system in First Aid.

I did USMLE Rx questions for Pathology.
 
Top