The opinion of sports science professionals for the benefit of statistics: an international web-based survey

Abstract

Objectives: The present study, an international web-based survey, was focused on four aims: to obtain sports science professional’s self-reported statistical knowledge levels and how this knowledge varies by research area, to investigate and specify when statistics courses should be taught in sports science education and to identify the key statistical methods relevant to sports science education.

Methods: In the present study, sports science professional data obtained by a web-based survey. Participants were selected randomly from the PubMed (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) database for the years 2010-2018 using the keywords “school of sports science, faculty of sports science, sports faculty” by screening the sports science journals. Therefore, the participants were determined by searching the keywords in the corresponding or the first author’s address information of the articles.

Results: The results indicate that while sports science professionals emphasize statistics education and the participants also believe that taking a statistics course is useful for their occupation. A statistics education should also emphasize the necessity of statistical consultation.

Conclusions: Our study provides information regarding self-reported levels of statistical knowledge of sports science professionals by research area and academic position, and provides guidance regarding the ideal semester for administering a statistics course. 

Keywords

• Statistics course,statistics knowledge,sports science education,sports science professionals,web based survey

References

1. 1. Moskowitz E. Statistics in dentistry. Who needs them? N Y State Dent J 2007;73:4.
2. 2. Ocakoğlu G, Ercan İ, Kaya MO, Uzabacı E, Can FE. Investigating academic veterinarians’ knowledge of biostatistics: a web-based survey. Ankara Üniv Vet Fak Derg 2015;62:223-8.
3. 3. Ocakoglu G, Ercan I, Gunel Karadeniz P. Knowledge of dentists about biostatistics: a worldwide survey. e-J Dent 2013;3:361-70.
4. 4. Ercan İ, Ocakoğlu G, Özkaya G, Sığırlı D, Cangür Ş, Günel Karadeniz P. An international survey of physicians' knowledge of biostatistics. Turkiye Klinikleri J Med Sci 2013;33:401-9.
5. 5. Ocakoğlu G, Kaya MO, Can FE, Atış S, Macunluoğlu AC. Nursing professionals' attitudes toward biostatistics: an international web-based survey. Eur Res J 2019;5:326-34.
6. 6. Ercan I, Ozkaya G, Ocakoglu G, Yazici B, Sezer A, Ediz B, et al. Determining biostatistics knowledge of students and physicians in medical school. InterStat 2008;3:1-17.
7. 7. Ercan İ, Ocakoğlu G, Sığırlı D, Özkaya G. Assessment of submitted manuscripts in medical sciences according to statistical errors. Turkiye Klinikleri J Med Sci 2012;32:1381-7.
8. 8. Ercan I, Gunel Karadeniz P, Cangur S, Özkaya G, Demirtas H. Examining of published articles with respect to statistical errors in medical sciences. Int J Hematol Oncol 2015;27:130-8.

9. 9. Ercan I, Kaya MO, Uzabaci E, Mankir S, Can FE, Bashir Albishir M. Examination of published articles with respect to statistical errors in veterinary sciences. Acta Vet Beograd 2017;67:33-42.
10. 10. MacArthur RD, Jackson GG. An evaluation of the use of statistical methodology in the Journal of Infectious Diseases. J Infect Dis 1984;149:349-54.
11. 11. McGuigan SM. The use of statistics in the British Journal of Psychiatry. Br J Psychiatr 1995;167:683-8.
12. 12. Welch GE 2nd, Gabbe SG. Review of statistics usage in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175:1138-41.
13. 13. Ahn W. Statistical methods in the articles in the Korean Journal of Anesthesiology published from 1994 to 1998. Korean J Anesthesiol 2000;39:706-11.
14. 14. Chambers CD, Feredoes E, Muthukumaraswamy SD, Etchells P. Instead of" playing the game" it is time to change the rules: Registered Reports at AIMS Neuroscience and beyond. AIMS Neuroscience 2014;1:4-17.
15. 15. Casals M, Finch CF. Sports Biostatistician: a critical member of all sports science and medicine teams for injury prevention. Inj Prev 2017;23:423-7.
16. 16. Weissgerber TL, Garovic VD, Milin-Lazovic JS, Winham SJ, Obradovic Z, Trzeciakowski JP, et al. Reinventing biostatistics education for basic scientists. PLoS Biol 2016;14:e1002430.
17. 17. Freeman JV, Collier S, Staniforth D, Smith KJ. Innovations in curriculum design: a multi-disciplinary approach to teaching statistics to undergraduate medical students. BMC Med Educ 2008;8:28.
18. 18. Sahai H, Ojeda MM. Problems and challenges of teaching biostatistics to medical students and professionals. Med Teach 1999;21:286-8.
19. 19. Kitchen CM. Nonparametric vs parametric tests of location in biomedical research. Am J Ophthalmol 2009;147:571-2.
20. 20. Zimmerman DW. Invalidation of parametric and nonparametric statistical tests by concurrent violation of two assumptions. J Exp Educ 1998;67:55-68.
21. 21. Hoskin T. Parametric and nonparametric: demystifying the terms. Mayo Clinic. 2012.
22. 22. Sax LJ, Gilmartin SK, Bryant AN. Assessing response rates and nonresponse bias in web and paper surveys. Res High Educ 2003;44:409-32.
23. 23. Yasmeen S, Romano PS, Tancredi DJ, Saito NH, Rainwater J, Kravitz RL. Screening mammography beliefs and recommendations: a web-based survey of primary care physicians. BMC Health Serv Res 2012;12:32.
24. 24. Kim HL, Hollowell CM, Patel RV, Bales GT, Clayman RV, Gerber GS. Use of new technology in endourology and laparoscopy by American urologists: Internet and postal survey. Urology 2000;56:760-5.