Assessing statistical literacy in medical students and doctors: a single-centre, cross-sectional survey in South Korea.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Sun Young Lee, Soela Kim, Soyun Kim, Yukyung Shin, Jae-Joon Yim, Hyeontaek Hwang, Youngsuk Kwon, Un-Na Kim, Young Kyung Do
{"title":"Assessing statistical literacy in medical students and doctors: a single-centre, cross-sectional survey in South Korea.","authors":"Sun Young Lee, Soela Kim, Soyun Kim, Yukyung Shin, Jae-Joon Yim, Hyeontaek Hwang, Youngsuk Kwon, Un-Na Kim, Young Kyung Do","doi":"10.1136/bmjopen-2024-095173","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Healthcare professionals must possess statistical literacy to provide evidence-based care and engage patients in decision-making. However, there have been concerns about healthcare professionals' inadequate understanding of health statistics. As an initial step in addressing the issue, we assessed the statistical literacy of medical students and doctors in South Korea by evaluating their comprehension of four statistical concepts: (a) single-event probability, (b) relative risk reduction, (c) positive predictive value and (d) 5-year survival rate.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional survey study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The survey was conducted from October 2018 to January 2019 in one medical school and its affiliated teaching hospital in Seoul, South Korea.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>303 medical students from all six grades and 291 doctors from various specialties.</p><p><strong>Primary and secondary outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome measure was the correct answer rate for each question. The secondary outcome measure was the mean number of correct answers across the four statistical literacy questions, calculated for each individual.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The correct answer rates for basic numeracy questions were close to 100%. Regarding statistical literacy, 95.5% and 83.2% of the participants accurately understood single-event probability and relative risk reduction, respectively. However, only 49.3% and 49.2% of the participants accurately understood the positive predictive value and 5-year survival rate, respectively. The correct answer rates for the question about the 5-year survival rate differed significantly between students (40.9%) and doctors (57.7%) (p<0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in the correct answer rates for other questions, regardless of the student's grade level or the doctor's specialty.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Medical students and doctors have weaker statistical literacy than their basic numeracy. Therefore, it is essential to implement medical education and professional development programmes that focus on improving their statistical literacy. These programmes should specifically address measures of medical test accuracy and the distinction between a 5-year survival rate and mortality.</p>","PeriodicalId":9158,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open","volume":"15 4","pages":"e095173"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-095173","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Healthcare professionals must possess statistical literacy to provide evidence-based care and engage patients in decision-making. However, there have been concerns about healthcare professionals' inadequate understanding of health statistics. As an initial step in addressing the issue, we assessed the statistical literacy of medical students and doctors in South Korea by evaluating their comprehension of four statistical concepts: (a) single-event probability, (b) relative risk reduction, (c) positive predictive value and (d) 5-year survival rate.

Design: Cross-sectional survey study.

Setting: The survey was conducted from October 2018 to January 2019 in one medical school and its affiliated teaching hospital in Seoul, South Korea.

Participants: 303 medical students from all six grades and 291 doctors from various specialties.

Primary and secondary outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was the correct answer rate for each question. The secondary outcome measure was the mean number of correct answers across the four statistical literacy questions, calculated for each individual.

Results: The correct answer rates for basic numeracy questions were close to 100%. Regarding statistical literacy, 95.5% and 83.2% of the participants accurately understood single-event probability and relative risk reduction, respectively. However, only 49.3% and 49.2% of the participants accurately understood the positive predictive value and 5-year survival rate, respectively. The correct answer rates for the question about the 5-year survival rate differed significantly between students (40.9%) and doctors (57.7%) (p<0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in the correct answer rates for other questions, regardless of the student's grade level or the doctor's specialty.

Conclusions: Medical students and doctors have weaker statistical literacy than their basic numeracy. Therefore, it is essential to implement medical education and professional development programmes that focus on improving their statistical literacy. These programmes should specifically address measures of medical test accuracy and the distinction between a 5-year survival rate and mortality.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMJ Open
BMJ Open MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
3.40%
发文量
4510
审稿时长
2-3 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Open is an online, open access journal, dedicated to publishing medical research from all disciplines and therapeutic areas. The journal publishes all research study types, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialist studies. Publishing procedures are built around fully open peer review and continuous publication, publishing research online as soon as the article is ready.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信