CONCLUSION
Clinicians use statistical methodology both to analyze their own
data and to assess the value of others' scientific reports. Because data analysis
is generally the application of one of a number of commercial computer packages,
each with its own menus, formatting, and subtle caveats,
the most valuable suggestion to the budding statistician is to know the program,
read the manual, and plot the data. The human visual system is well adapted to see
groups and trends—if the conclusions do not look like they fit the data, caution
and skepticism are prudent.
When assessing the value of a scientific report, a careful clinician
reads the "methods" section and asks the questions suggested earlier: Are the subjects
selected to minimize bias? Are the statistical methods appropriate? Is the study
large enough to be statistically powerful? Are the conclusions warranted by the
evidence? Can the conclusions from this study be extended to cover more general
cases or do they apply only to the limited situation under study?
Finally, despite the best statistical approaches and the most
careful experimental procedures, a wise clinician recognizes that even some apparently
well done experiments can yield erroneous conclusions. A study that produces an
important clinical conclusion, especially one that seems to change tradition or violate
previous theoretical understanding, bears confirmation by another group using different
patients in a different setting. Healthy skepticism is the basis of good statistics
and good science.
