Robbins Pathologic basis of disease is not enough for pathology.....

[Prince090]

Hi there,

I assumed that everything you need to know about pathology is in "big robbins". I wrote a test some days back in which a question was asked regarding traumatic fat necrosis. In robbins, only enzymatic fat necrosis is discussed. Needless to say, I got that question wrong. Some of my friends knew the answer to that particular question and they told me that I should start reading "review books". They were right. Traumatic fat necrosis is discussed in review books such as goljan,pathoma and brs.

So it means that not everything is covered in big robbins and just reading it alone will not make you a " champion " in pathology.

So,are there any other important things which are not in robbins but in other books ?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[NeedToStudy]

Dude, if big robbins is not enough for pathology then it's not humanely possible to learn pathology. They're going to have to start making robots take step 1.

 

[ERPCT]

Page 1070.

 

[Brain Bucket]

n=1 . If you know big Robbins, you'll spank anyone who just did BRS or RR or Pathoma in terms of Path content (everything else being equal); the question is whether you want to put yourself through that kind of pain.

 

[notbobtrustme]

I'm so pissed that I bought Big Robbins. Haven't touched that since September.

 

[Leonidis I]

Page 1070.

lol and this is why i don't read big robbins. you get a bunch of information thrown at you but don't retain it all because its tough to make multiple passes of it since it's too long. you need to use books that are in your goldilocks range - comprehensive enough that they cover the main points but short enough that you can make multiple passes to retain that info.

also not everything on boards will be in robbins. i remember one of the goljan audios he was talking about how there was a question that asked why patients with osteogenesis imperfecta have blue sclera (the scleral collagen is thinned and reveals the choroidal veins). he said he looked in robbins and it wasn't there. he looked in harrison's and it wasn't there. finally he found it in nelson's peds. now that fact is in pretty much every step1 review book.

you might get random crap thrown at you like that won't be in any common ms1, ms2 resource until a testtaker reveals it to goljan/sattar/first aid/uworld and it becomes part of step1 review like that blue sclera fact.

 

[Prince090]

Page 1070.

The test was from the first topic . There is no mention of traumatic fat necrosis in the first topic i.e cell injury.

 

[Prince090]

lol and this is why i don't read big robbins. you get a bunch of information thrown at you but don't retain it all because its tough to make multiple passes of it since it's too long. you need to use books that are in your goldilocks range - comprehensive enough that they cover the main points but short enough that you can make multiple passes to retain that info.

also not everything on boards will be in robbins. i remember one of the goljan audios he was talking about how there was a question that asked why patients with osteogenesis imperfecta have blue sclera (the scleral collagen is thinned and reveals the choroidal veins). he said he looked in robbins and it wasn't there. he looked in harrison's and it wasn't there. finally he found it in nelson's peds. now that fact is in pretty much every step1 review book.

you might get random crap thrown at you like that won't be in any common ms1, ms2 resource until a testtaker reveals it to goljan/sattar/first aid/uworld and it becomes part of step1 review like that blue sclera fact.

Thanks for the heads up. I will keep your comments in mind.

 

[PrideNeverDie]

The test was from the first topic . There is no mention of traumatic fat necrosis in the first topic i.e cell injury.

that is why you read the entire book in the summer

hand in your gunner card

 

[Prince090]

that is why you read the entire book in the summer

hand in your gunner card

Sarcasm.....

 

[TooMuchResearch]

The test was from the first topic . There is no mention of traumatic fat necrosis in the first topic i.e cell injury.

Then your complaint is with the test, not text, authors.

 

[alpinism]

lol and this is why i don't read big robbins. you get a bunch of information thrown at you but don't retain it all because its tough to make multiple passes of it since it's too long. you need to use books that are in your goldilocks range - comprehensive enough that they cover the main points but short enough that you can make multiple passes to retain that info.

This.

Also there's a crapton of useless minutiae in big robbins that even path residents don't need to know.

 

[D elegans]

If you are able to read and retain all of Robbins then you will do awesomely in path. Nearly no one does this because there are much more efficient ways to learn the material for testing purposes.

 

[notbobtrustme]

Then your complaint is with the test, not text, authors.

It should be with the authors. Why move around the all the necessary information instead of putting it all succinctly. Instead of Big Robbins, you can watch Pathoma or read Goljan and get everything you need to know, instead of playing with the index and skipping around 500 pages for every topic. The book is garbage and a waste of money.

Sure, go ahead and read all 1000 pages of it. While you do that, I'll just read First Aid twice over, watch Pathoma and read Goljan and still spend less time than you. As a resource for medical students, this book is worse than useless.

 

[IamPsychiatrist]

It should be with the authors. Why move around the all the necessary information instead of putting it all succinctly. Instead of Big Robbins, you can watch Pathoma or read Goljan and get everything you need to know, instead of playing with the index and skipping around 500 pages for every topic. The book is garbage and a waste of money.

Sure, go ahead and read all 1000 pages of it. While you do that, I'll just read First Aid twice over, watch Pathoma and read Goljan and still spend less time than you. As a resource for medical students, this book is worse than useless.

Sure.

But the Pathoma guy and everyone else had to learn it somewhere. Where do you think they learned it?

So were lucky that people have gone through it for us and distilled it.

 

[notbobtrustme]

Sure.

But the Pathoma guy and everyone else had to learn it somewhere. Where do you think they learned it?

So were lucky that people have gone through it for us and distilled it.

Dr. Sattar has been breathing pathology for the past 10 years or something. I don't doubt he read Big Robbins, but he also knows how to interpret the text and make sense so that the rest of us don't need to do that as medical students. If you do decide to get into pathology, then yes, Big Robbins will be your book, because pathology will be your focus 90% of the time. Med students have to juggle much more (in terms of subject matter, not depth) and Big Robbins is a waste of time for us.