Nelson Adin
Assistant Professor, Department of Pediatrics, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School.
MedEdPORTAL. 2018 Nov 9;14:10771. doi: 10.15766/mep_2374-8265.10771.
Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values-the basic statistics behind using and interpreting screening and diagnostic tests-are taught in all medical schools, yet studies have shown that a majority of physicians cannot correctly define and apply these concepts. Previous work has not rigorously examined this disconnect and attempted to address it.
We used adult learning theory to design a case-based interactive workshop to review biostatistics and apply them to clinical decision-making using Bayes' theorem. Participants took an anonymous multiple-choice pretest, posttest, and delayed posttest on definitions and application of the concepts, and we compared the scores between the three tests. Several experiences with early iterations provided feedback to improve the workshop but were not included for analysis.
We conducted the finalized workshop with 54 pediatrics students, residents, and faculty. All learners completed the immediate pre- and posttests, and eight completed the delayed posttest. Average scores rose from 4.5/8 (56%) on the pretest to 6.5/8 (81%) on the posttest and 6.4/8 (80%) on the delayed posttest. Two-tailed tests showed < .001 for the difference between the pretest and both posttests, and post hoc power analysis showed a power of 99% to detect the observed differences. There was no significant difference ( = .8) between the posttest and delayed posttest.
Our work demonstrates that an interactive workshop reviewing basic biostatistics and teaching rational diagnostic testing using Bayes' theorem can be effective in connecting theoretical knowledge of biostatistics to evidence-based decision-making in real clinical practice.
敏感性、特异性和预测值——这些是使用和解释筛查及诊断测试背后的基本统计学概念,所有医学院校都会讲授。然而,研究表明,大多数医生无法正确定义和应用这些概念。以往的工作并未对这种脱节现象进行严格审视,也未尝试解决这一问题。
我们运用成人学习理论设计了一个基于案例的互动式工作坊,以复习生物统计学知识,并使用贝叶斯定理将其应用于临床决策。参与者就这些概念的定义和应用进行了匿名多项选择的预测试、后测试和延迟后测试,我们比较了这三项测试的分数。早期几次迭代的一些经验为改进工作坊提供了反馈,但未纳入分析。
我们对54名儿科学生、住院医师和教员开展了最终的工作坊。所有学习者都完成了即时的预测试和后测试,8人完成了延迟后测试。平均分数从前测试的4.5/8(56%)提高到后测试的6.5/8(81%)以及延迟后测试的6.4/8(80%)。双尾检验显示,前测试与两个后测试之间的差异p <.001,事后功效分析显示检测到观察到的差异的功效为99%。后测试与延迟后测试之间没有显著差异(p =.8)。
我们的工作表明,一个复习基本生物统计学知识并使用贝叶斯定理教授合理诊断测试的互动式工作坊,能够有效地将生物统计学的理论知识与实际临床实践中的循证决策联系起来。