Statistical Literacy Among Academic Pathologists: A Survey Study to Gauge Knowledge of Frequently Used Statistical Tests Among Trainees and Faculty

Abstract

Context.—Statistical literacy can be defined as understanding the statistical tests and terminology needed for the design, analysis, and conclusions of original research or laboratory testing. Little is known about the statistical literacy of clinical or anatomic pathologists. Objective.—To determine the statistical methods most commonly used in pathology studies from the literature and to assess familiarity and knowledge level of these statistical tests by pathology residents and practicing pathologists. Design.—The most frequently used statistical methods were determined by a review of 1100 research articles published in 11 pathology journals during 2015. Familiarity with statistical methods was determined by a survey of pathology trainees and practicing pathologists at 9 academic institutions in which pathologists were asked to rate their knowledge of the methods identified by the focused review of the literature. Results.—We identified 18 statistical tests that appear frequently in published pathology studies. On average, pathologists reported a knowledge level between “no knowledge” and “basic knowledge” of most statistical tests. Knowledge of tests was higher for more frequently used tests. Greater statistical knowledge was associated with a focus on clinical pathology versus anatomic pathology, having had a statistics course, having an advanced degree other than an MD degree, and publishing research. Statistical knowledge was not associated with length of pathology practice. Conclusions.—An audit of pathology literature reveals that knowledge of about 12 statistical tests would be sufficient to provide statistical literacy for pathologists. On average, most pathologists report they can interpret commonly used tests but are unable to perform them. Most pathologists indicated that they would benefit from additional statistical training.

Development of Statistical Literacy and Scientific Reasoning & Argumentation in Physicians

“…However, the participants in the study by Epstein and colleagues (2018) did not feel confident enough to conduct research on their own (34). This is particularly important because having already worked in research was associated with a higher SL and DC score in the present study and in Schmidt et al (2017). Moreover, Epstein and colleagues (2018) found, that medical graduates self-estimate their scientific skills after medical school as rather low (34).…”

The Value Proposition for Pathologists: A Population Health Approach

“…Although pathologists already have considerable training in the statistical methods used to validate our analytic processes and in systems thinking as well as operations approaches required to direct our laboratories, most pathologists report that they would benefit from more statistics training. 103 Training in health systems science should be provided to show how the skills and knowledge of pathologists can be applied to designing and potentially leading programs to improve health-care delivery. Likewise, basic principles of public health should be provided, especially in epidemiology, as it relates to the correlation of test utilization with population health.…”

False-positive pathology: improving reproducibility with the next generation of pathologists

“…Drawing on the literature from other disciplines, there are a number of ways the diagnostic pathology literature may be particularly prone to non-reproducible methods. First, pathologists are often not comfortable with statistical methods [21]. Pathologists report receiving very little formal training during graduate medical education and selfreport a lack of knowledge of even common methods.…”