Step I RR Pathology too detailed?

[AK_MD2BE]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

To those of you who have taken Step 1,
Do you think Goljan's RR Path is too detailed? It just seems like a monster of a "review" book (yeah, I know it has a lot of pictures, wide margins, blah, blah, blah...what nobody seems to mention is the small font...)? So, for those of you who have conquered Step 1 (congrats), would you use RR Path or BRS Path if you could do it over again? Thanks.

 

[Taus]

if you do a search w/ the terms "Rapid Review, BRS" or something similar I'm sure you'll find several recent threads comparing the two books head to head....IMO...hands down RR...."too many details" can be true if you are aiming to pass....but if your goal is to kill this thing then RR is dead-on....

 

[UCLAstudent]

Well, I'm hoping that I "killed" it and I didn't like RR Path at all. Way too detailed for my tastes. I ended up using BRS and liked it a lot.

 

[DoctorFunk]

RR might be considered a very large review book if you are looking at it solely as pathology review, but really it integrates so many other subjects that it is almost like an alternative to reviewing FA. I suggest reviewing the other subjects first, then reading through RR as your path/comprehensive review before making 1 or 2 passes through FA just prior to your exam.

 

[blz]

it's a good book if you're willing to put in the time. brs path is more than adequate though.

 

[ginger60]

I read RR path after reading BRS path and annotating FA with it, and I ended up replacing most of what I wrote in FA from BRS path and what was already written in FA path with notes from RR path. RR path just made it so much easier to remember, organize, and integrate path info, and I felt it really helped me in the exam. Unless you have been using BRS path already and love it, are really strapped for time, or only want to pass, I would definitely recommend RR path as a single source for path review--if I had to do it over again I would read RR path in depth and skim BRS path for anything not in RR (which isn't much).

 

[blz]

be careful of annotating your FA with low yield facts. Goljans book has a lot of detail, so don't go cluttering your FA with nonsense. Goljan said himself in his lectures that his notes are very extensive and cover topics on step 2 as well. I think the most optimal strategy for going through Goljan is to 1) read the chapter, 2) listen to the corresponding lectures, 3) annotate pertinent high yield sections in his book with his lecture audio (I did this while listening to the audio), 4) review annotated notes. It took me about 1.5wks to read his book and get through his audio. in the end, this was probably a little overly extensive for the purposes of the boards (path questions on the boards were basic after all this) but i feel i have gained a valuable fund of knowlege that is helping me greatly on the wards. You'll probably know more than your attendings with respect to the finer points of pathology (but you'll still be utterly clueless with clinical skills, diagnosis, and treatment).