What's so great about BRS Path?

[JBlue]

---

Members don't see this ad.

O.K. I have been using Goljan's Rapid Review for the past year and finally bought the BRS Path when the new edition came out. However, I just don't get what is so great about this book. It has about the same info as the RR but no pictures and less tables, lab information etc. The format seems less user friendly and it seems less clinical. I have only looked at the Endocrine section but right now I am feeling underwhelmed. Am I missing something? If I just stick to the Goljan will that be enough or should I read BRS as well just to be safe? What is it about BRS that everyone loves so much?

 

[YouDontKnowJack]

based on the posts in this forum, BRS is more popular, but people who use goljan do equally well or better

 

[dynx]

O.K. I have been using Goljan's Rapid Review for the past year and finally bought the BRS Path when the new edition came out. However, I just don't get what is so great about this book. It has about the same info as the RR but no pictures and less tables, lab information etc. The format seems less user friendly and it seems less clinical. I have only looked at the Endocrine section but right now I am feeling underwhelmed. Am I missing something? If I just stick to the Goljan will that be enough or should I read BRS as well just to be safe? What is it about BRS that everyone loves so much?

BRS covers everything. I have looked at Goljan's notes but not RR so I don't know how it compares specifically. The notes however are either to much or too little depending on if you go for the over 100pgs or 100pg and less versions. The deal is, if the info is the same, use what you like better. But BRS in my opinion is the standard for what you NEED to know. If RR has more info, it's likely too much, if it has less, its likely missing things.

 

[bigfrank]

You should use a review source that works for YOU. If you're asking yourself this question, you probably shouldn't use BRS Path.

 

[coolmavs]

Bigfrank, that is a great answer and a great suggestion! Very practical!

 

[OSUdoc08]

BRS covers everything. I have looked at Goljan's notes but not RR so I don't know how it compares specifically. The notes however are either to much or too little depending on if you go for the over 100pgs or 100pg and less versions. The deal is, if the info is the same, use what you like better. But BRS in my opinion is the standard for what you NEED to know. If RR has more info, it's likely too much, if it has less, its likely missing things.

RR does not have too much info at all. It is a very "rapid review." It also has plenty of practice questions in the back and on the CD.

 

[JBlue]

Thanks for the replys. I think I will look over the BRS as a review and do the questions but stick to the RR for now. Good point about using what works. I have gotten used to the format of RR so I think that is another reason why BRS seems so strange to me.

 

[om207]

I'm in the same situation. I've been using RR for the last few months and I guess I've gotten used to the format. I started annotating it because the margins are bigger. I'm thinking about just skimming BRS after I finish annotating each chapter of RR to check if there's any major info that was missed in RR. I really hope it doesn't take too much time. I think its best to stick with what works for you...for us its RR. 👍