BOTH Goljian Audio vs Rapid Review Path

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

PIacebo

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Messages
154
Reaction score
38
Would you say one was better than the other in terms of helping with path? (Am already using pathoma).

Members don't see this ad.
 
I don't understand how the two are comparable. One is like 125 pages of info and the other is like 800.
 
I listen to the audio in my commute, sometimes his integrations or stories help me remember some things. But that's the only time I listen to it, since I can't read while driving :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
^And one is years out of date.
Tbh, personally I don't think this makes it any less accurate for like 95% of the audio lectures I would say are perfect even for today (the pathophysiology for most things have not changed). However there are a few things that are considered "wrong" in terms of current times, but I think that if you have not been in a coma for the first 2 years of med school, you'll pick these out (e.g. Using troponin I for MI dx and CK MB for reinfarction instead of what Goljan says because troponin test was not as well established back then in literature/journals.).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Tbh, personally I don't think this makes it any less accurate for like 95% of the audio lectures I would say are perfect even for today (the pathophysiology for most things have not changed). However there are a few things that are considered "wrong" in terms of current times, but I think that if you have not been in a coma for the first 2 years of med school, you'll pick these out (e.g. Using troponin I for MI dx and CK MB for reinfarction instead of what Goljan says because troponin test was not as well established back then in literature/journals.).
Lol I remember his whole "this new troponin serum test is never going to replace CK-MB" rant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top