USMLE Step Up by Mehta-good or error prone

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

KBSO

Member
7+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
20+ Year Member
Joined
May 24, 2003
Messages
39
Reaction score
0
I would like to know if anyone has used the current 2003 Step-Up for USMLE and if there were many errors in the book. Many have given there support to First Aid, while a small number of others have praised the Step-Up. Earlier versions of Step-Up were supposedly littered with errors (heard about it from a 2000 paper from Linda Costanza).

Is the 2003 the same? Is it an adequate alternative or companion to First Aid?

Thanks,
KBSO

Members don't see this ad.
 
Step-up sucks, those that recommend it don't realize the number of mistakes the book actually has.
 
The publisher has a "corrected errors page" on the company website for the current edition. I have Step Up, I read through it once. It's not bad, but there's much higher yield stuff out there. Just check it out of your library, the neuro section is better than FA and there are some other interesting diagrams, but if your short on time, I wouldn't bother. good luck :cool:
 
Members don't see this ad :)
ASX said:
Step-up sucks, those that recommend it don't realize the number of mistakes the book actually has.

I used Step Up (2003) WAY more than FA because it was a helluva lot easier to follow for me. I knew the errors going in, corrected them before starting to annotate the thing with info from BSS questions and got a 243. If you're used to a systems based curriculum, might be good to check out. If you're used to a traditional curriculum, FA would probably be a better way to go.
 
I would like to thank everybody that contributed to this information. That's all great advice and it's what I need to decide what to purchase at the upcoming AMSA book sale. :)

This is a stupid question but, what exactly is "traditional" vs. system's based? Our school taught physiology by systems(cardiovascular, endocrine, renal,etc.), isn't that "traditional?" Or rather a systems base approach for ex. is teaching the histology, anatomy, biochemistry of let's say the endocrine system all at once? :confused:

Take care and good luck in your studies,
KBSO :)
 
Systems based, at least how I refer to it, is learning all about one system at a time (ie biochem, anatomy, histo, physio, etc of the cardio system) Kind of like the way Step Up is set up. Traditional is doing all of a biochem course at once, then switching to physiology course all at once, like undergrad and like FA is set up.
 
I'd say check it out from the library. It had a bunch of mistakes, but I liked it because it contained stuff that wasn't in FA and it also presented it in a way that you can learn the material rather than memorize random facts.
 
my second year i ahve systems curr , does anyone reccomend annotating step up and adding the stuff from first aid into there as well as other sources?
 
Thanks for the info again, I guess our school is the traditional curriculm. The systems-based I think makes things more cohesive so I'll definitely get FA, but greatly consider Step Up with or without the errors since the errors are posted. :)
 
Top