[devil_r_z]

There quite a few things I’ve learned in my first year of medical school–most of them have been the second half of the year as I implemented those things which actually worked. The first semester was more finding out what I was doing wrong and although I did well grade-wise, it was WAY too costly in terms of time and energy in how I went about it. I know I have some pre-med readers, and this is focused especially to them, perhaps too to those already in med school who might benefit a trifle from all the wisdom I’ve gained so far. If I can sum up my study philosophy in a pithy saying, it’s this: study from general to specific. This, on the surface, sounds obvious as who in their right mind would study something in detail for which they don’t know the general, but you’d be surprised how many textbooks and lectures go about it exactly this way. My favorite example of this is gross anatomy. One studies the upper limbs for example, and the textbook will start with bony structures where applicable and go into all those details, then go to muscles and go into exhaustive detail, then go to vasculature in exhaustive detail, then to innervation, joints/ligaments, etc. Each mini-section is complete with its own table of nerves, vessels, muscle origin/insertions, etc. down to the last named nerve/artery/whatever. This is ridiculous. I can’t imagine the brain of a person who will know every last named arterial branches of a part of the body and when asked about nerves, say, “I don’t know–I haven’t gotten there yet.” By the time you’re “done” to put it all together, you’re overwhelmed and are forgetting very basic information.

Take something big and obvious: vasculature of the abdomen. The descending aorta gives rise to the celiac trunk which will provide blood to the stomach, spleen, liver, etc. This is where you should pause. Learn just enough branches to figure out a topology of the major vessels which feed the main organs then move on, in this case, to the superior mesenteric artery. Learn what it supplies in a macro sense, then move on. When you’re no longer in the abdomen (R/L ilac aa.), stop, then go back and learn a few branches deeper at each level. The mistake is to try to learn what’s on the page in Netter with 25+ labels facing you with no clue of a logical progression of bloodflow.

Lastly, I want to say that you have to study from primary sources–textbooks, good notes from professors, or the like. Unfortunately, a good chunk of the first two years is doing exactly that, but you are setting the stage for serious pain when, in your clinical years, you have to synthesize that information into a logical whole in real-time and you don’t have any depth to draw from, just topical factoids with no sense of belonging. Don’t even get me started on studying from old tests…we all do it when we get our hands on them because as long as we are graded, we want to do as well as we can, but that should be last after you’ve put in your real time studying. It shouldn’t act as a checklist by which you go about learning something de novo. Just because it’s not asked doesn’t mean you don’t need to know it (and conversely, just because a professor has a pet topic doesn’t mean it needs to be memorized beyond the scope of the class). How does one know? Ah, that’s the rub… that’s part of the anxiety that drives us to keep learning when our own motivation wanes.
wish ya all good luck!!!