Be Aware of Health Statistics
Keywords:
Health Statistics,, Screening,, Relative Risk,, Statistical Bias,, Medical CommunicationAbstract
This article discusses the importance of health statistics literacy, which affects decision-making among patients and medical personnel, especially in the context of disease screening, statistical data communication, and the influence of various statistical values that may lead to misunderstandings, such as relative risk, absolute risk, conditional probability, and biases in the use of statistical data (Bias) such as lead time bias and overdiagnosis bias. The article also discusses the problems of using statistical numbers that mislead the public and doctors, such as cancer screening advertisements that give the image that early detection increases survival rates regardless of mortality rates. It also discusses the use of tumor markers such as CEA and PSA, which may lead to unnecessary diagnoses, anxiety, and unnecessary overdiagnosis and overtreatment. To create a correct understanding of health statistics, the article proposes guidelines for communicating correct statistical data, including presenting risk values in an easy-to-understand format, such as absolute risk values instead of relative risk values, using natural numbers to explain probability instead of percentages, and using diagrams to help explain so that the public can make more rational decisions.
References
Gigerenzer G, Gaissmaier W, Kurz-Milcke E, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S. Helping Doctors and Patients Make Sense of Health Statistics. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2007 Nov;8(2):53-96.
Liu Z, Zhang Y, Niu Y, Li K, Liu X, Chen H, Gao C. A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic and prognostic serum biomarkers of colorectal cancer. PLoS One. 2014 Aug 8;9(8):e103910.
W. Imsamran A. Pattatang, P. Supaattagorn, I. Chiawiriyabunya K. Namthaisong, M. Wongsena, P. Puttawibul, I. Chitapanarux K. Suwanrungruang, S. Sangrajrang, R. Buasom. Cancer in Thailand Vol. IX, 2013-2015.Bangkok:New Thammada Press (Thailand) Co., Ltd.;2018;28-30.
Crawford NP, Colliver DW, Galandiuk S. Tumor markers and colorectal cancer: utility in management. J Surg Oncol. 2003 Dec;84(4):239-48.
Locker GY, Hamilton S, Harris J, Jessup JM, Kemeny N, Macdonald JS, Somerfield MR, Hayes DF, Bast RC Jr; ASCO. ASCO 2006 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in gastrointestinal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006 Nov 20;24(33):5313-27.
Yasuda S5, Fujii H, Nakahara T, et al. 18F-FDG PET detection of colonic adenomas. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:989-992.
Abdel-Nabi H, Doerr RI, Lamonica DM, et al. Staging of primary colorectal carcinomas with fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose whole-body PET: correlation with histopathologic and CT findings. Radiology. 1998;206:755-760.
Cameron J Parkin, Stephen W Bell, Naseem Mirbagheri.Colorectal cancer screening in Australia: An update.AJGP.2018 Dec;47(12):859-863.
Liu N, Vigod SN, Farrugia MM, Urquia ML, Ray JG. Venous thromboembolism after induced abortion: a population-based, propensity-score-matched cohort study in Canada. Lancet Haematol. 2018 Jul;5(7):e279-e288.
James AH. Venous thromboembolism in pregnancy. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2009 Mar;29(3):326-31.
James AH, Jamison MG, Brancazio LR, Myers ER. Venous thromboembolism during pregnancy and the postpartum period: incidence, risk factors, and mortality. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 194: 1311–1315.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.