Numeracy and judgement beside the writing
Medical writing requires more than fluent sentences. Writers need numerical understanding, scientific judgement and the ability to organise work and explain evidence. The depth of statistical knowledge needed varies with the role, but reliable reporting depends on understanding what the numbers mean.
Competence beyond language
Medical writers need competence in both numeracy and literacy. They may also be expected to manage, support or drive a publication project from investigator and kickoff meetings through submission, peer review and approved proofs. Freelancers need professional skills such as presentation, rhetoric and self-organisation alongside their writing skills.
Eagerness to learn new skills and ideas, appreciation of the scientific process and strong basic language skills contribute to good medical writing. Understanding researchers’ goals and perspectives helps writers and editors prepare work for professional audiences or translate it for general readers. Newcomers should develop as many new skills as possible, since they may prove useful later.
Scientific thinking and language skills need to work together. One medical editor with a scientific background held that studying research does not initially produce the same writing as doing research, and that writing with a scientist’s understanding requires years of experience and an open, careful mind. Writers of any background should continue learning to think and write like scientists.
Statistical understanding for the role
Basic statistics helps writers understand how knowledge is produced in medicine and science, how research is designed and how to read numbers in scientific articles. Authors’ editors and regulatory writers may need deeper understanding when creating or editing tables and graphs or working with heavily quantitative articles. Statistical-data analysis is particularly relevant to publication and regulatory work, and understanding study-design options helps address gaps associated with a non-clinical background.
Correct analysis by researchers does not guarantee correct reporting: a writer who misunderstands even simple statistics can misstate an otherwise sound analysis. Associations and correlations also provide opportunities for errors when statistical understanding is weak. At least basic statistical understanding and effective communication and collaboration with biostatisticians are needed to do the work well.
Statistical knowledge also supports consulting and literature-review roles in which writers advise clients on strategy and evidence-based medicine. Understanding the advantages and limitations of study designs is part of that competence.
In a September 2017 survey of AMWA members in six western US states, 122 of 685 members responded (17.8%). Respondents more commonly selected statistical knowledge and effective quality-control tactics as essential skills than outlining or paragraph and sentence structure. Research-based training can provide exposure to data analysis and help develop analytical capacity, which can be difficult to teach on the job.
Learning statistics for writing
Statistics education directed at writers can make complex ideas accessible without requiring a heavily mathematical university course whose content may not suit writing or editing work. In 2007, available options included AMWA’s Statistics for Medical Writers and Editors and a more detailed three-day course within the Graham School of General Studies medical-editing certificate programme. Lang and Secic’s How to Report Statistics in Medicine provides another resource.
An initial dislike of statistics need not prevent later learning: one writer who had avoided it gradually found it interesting during more than ten years in medical writing.