French academic physicians had a poor knowledge of terms used in clinical epidemiology.
OBJECTIVE
To assess academic physicians' understanding and usage of basic epidemiological terms commonly used in medical journals.


METHODS
Observational study. A total of 274 physicians, working in a teaching hospital in Paris, France were asked to answer a questionnaire including four vignettes presenting the results of a therapeutic, a diagnostic, a prognostic study and a meta-analysis of clinical trials.


RESULTS
A total of 130 (47%) questionnaires were returned. We observed the highest proportion of good answers for questions about absolute risk reduction (87.7%), sensitivity (84.6%), and specificity (80%); and the lowest for the calculation and use of the likelihood ratio (16.9% and 9.2%, respectively). The global mean score was 5.0/10 (95% confidence interval=4.6-5.4, range 0-9.4). Physicians got higher scores for questions related to treatment than for questions related to diagnosis: mean scores 7.1 (6.6-7.6) vs. 4.2 (3.8-4.6). Regression analysis did not reveal any significant relationship between global performance and physicians' age (r2=0.002, not significant [NS])


CONCLUSIONS
Physicians demonstrated only moderate knowledge and usage of clinical epidemiology terms used in major medical journals. Their capacity to interpret quantitative data from medical scientific literature may be limited.
Estellat
Candice
C
Centre d'investigations épidémiologiques 4, INSERM, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, 75015 Paris, France.
Faisy
Christophe
C
Colombet
Isabelle
I
Chatellier
Gilles
G
Burnand
Bernard
B
Durieux
Pierre
P
D002983:Clinical Competence; D004813:Epidemiology; D005602:France; D007722:Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; D006784:Hospitals, Teaching; D006801:Humans; D008505:Medical Staff, Hospital; D010820:Physicians; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D009626:Terminology as Topic