Statistical Literacy in Obstetricians and Gynecologists

Abstract

The Obstetrician-Gynecologist Statistical Literacy Questionnaire (OGSLQ) was designed to examine physicians' understanding of various number tasks that are relevant to obstetrician-gynecologists (ob-gyns) practice. Forty-seven percent of the nationally representative, practicing ob-gyns responded. Physicians did poorly on the questions about numerical facts (e.g., number of women living with HIV/AIDS), better on questions about statistical concepts (e.g., incidence, prevalence), and best on questions about numerical relationships (e.g., convert frequency to percentage) with 0%, 7%, 36%, answering all correctly, respectively. Only 19% correctly estimated the number of U.S. women with cancer. Sixty-six percent were able to use sensitivity and specificity to choose a test option. Around 90% could translate between frequency and probability formats. Forty-nine percent of respondents were able to calculate the positive predictive value of a mammography screening test. Physicians lack some understanding of statistical literacy. It is important that we monitor physicians' statistical literacy and provide training to students and physicians.

Invasive Prenatal Diagnostic Testing Recommendations are Influenced by Maternal Age, Statistical Misconception and Perceived Liability

“…3 Variation in degree of agreement with statements about amniocentesis among physicians with either the same or different recommendations for 28-year-old and 37-year-old pregnant women pregnancies.^We attribute the increased weight these OB/ GYNs placed on maternal age to two factors, the first being physicians' limited understanding of screening test statistics (Wegwarth, Schwartz, Woloshin, Gaissmaier, & Gigerenzer, 2012). Research has shown that OB/GYNs have gaps in their ability to comprehend statistical concepts (Anderson, Gigerenzer, Parker, & Schulkin, 2014), and, perhaps surprisingly, genetic counselors often need further clarification from the testing laboratory about test results (McGovern, Benach, & Zinberg, 2003). If this is true of genetic counselors with thorough genetics training, it is certainly reasonable to assume that OB/GYNs with minimal genetics training should feel less than confident in their knowledge and interpretation of results.…”

Conflicting and Changing Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations: Survey Study of a National Sample of ob-gyns after the Release of the 2009 USPSTF Guidelines

“…Although this recommendation is good in theory, it may prove difficult to implement in practice due to ob‐gyns’ limited time with their patients. In addition, research has found that both patients and physicians misunderstand statistical information about breast health and mammography screening test results (Anderson, Gigerenzer, Parker, & Schulkin, ; Gigerenzer, Gaissmaier, Kurz‐Milcke, Schwartz, & Woloshin, ; Schwartz, Woloshin, Black, & Welch, ). If ob‐gyn physicians are going to provide more counseling on benefits and risks of breast cancer screening, counseling tools will be needed that help them not only adequately inform their patients, but also facilitate shared decision making that incorporates patient values.…”

A blended learning training programme for health information providers to enhance implementation of the Guideline Evidence-based Health Information: development and qualitative pilot study

“…Here too, the participants asked for a theoretical introduction to statistical and methodological terms on the basis of practical examples. Studies revealed shortcomings regarding medical professionals' statistical literacy [27][28][29][30]. For instance, Jenny et al…”