7 ms·
As a doctor, they may have a better understanding of placebos and statistics.
by hnhg 7y ago
As a doctor, they may have a better understanding of placebos and statistics.
- nerdponx 7y agoBetter than my years of experience doing statistics professionally?
- moron4hire 7y agoMy experience has been that doctors are terrible statisticians
- nerdponx 7y agoAnd, to their credit, they don't really have time to become good statisticians. Once upon a time I had a classmate who was an experienced anesthesiologist, but when it came to probability and stats he was as much of a scrub is anyone else in the room. Why would it be any different? He's spent his life learning and applying his field of practice, not someone else's. That said, baaic statistical analysis and statistical intuition is a severely underappreciated skill. It's hard to see it almost totally neglected in American public schools, even ones that purport to have a strong focus on STEM.
- moron4hire 7y agoYes, that is very true. I'm sorry I didn't include that sentiment in my own post. But it does mean that you should press your doctors for information, do your own research, argue with your doctor if you do have a good handle on stats.
- JamesBarney 7y agoYou'd be surprised at the lack of statistical knowledge most doctors have.
- thih9 7y agoThis seems an offtopic generalisation and looks unhelpful to me in this context. I’d like it more if it linked to a study. Or if it had more details, preferably addressing placebos too.
- pBody 7y agoIt seems that way, but it’s not. https://europepmc.org/abstract/med/9078698 https://europepmc.org/abstract/med/9078698 https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-28166019 https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-28166019 There is a depressing amount of evidence that doctors don’t have a basic level of statistical literacy.
- mistermann 7y agoI wonder how many doctors (truly) understand that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Heuristics are a hell of a drug.