Translating Biostatistics in Market Research: A Moderator’s Guide to Engaging Physicians with Clarity and Confidence

Living the Complexity: A Moderator’s Daily Reality

At ThinkGen, we spend our days deep in the weeds of complex, high-science marketing research across pharmaceutical, biotech, medical device, and diagnostics categories. We’re not theorizing about how physicians interpret clinical trial data—we're in the room with them, virtually or in person, navigating their responses to target product profiles (TPPs), varying clinical trial result scenarios, and data-driven clinical and/or promotional messages.

What we've learned through thousands of interviews is this: understanding biostatistics is only half the battle. The real skill lies in translating that data into something clinically meaningful—not just for the doctor, but for the patient.

‍

Physicians Know Data, But Use It Differently

Clinicians are trained in evidence-based medicine, but their focus is always on applicability to real-world patient care. This means that when presented with p-values, Kaplan-Meier curves, hazard ratios, or risk reductions, they instinctively process it in terms of, "What does this mean for my patient?" As qualitative moderators, we must constantly (and often proactively) bridge the gap between statistical outputs and clinical narratives.

It's not just about ensuring the physician understands the concept, but also about exploring how they would internalize and use that concept in real-world decision-making.

‍

The Dual Lens: Physician Interpretation and Patient Communication

One of the most critical, yet often overlooked, parts of our job is helping our clients understand not only how physicians interpret the data, but also how they plan to communicate it to patients and caregivers. That second layer—how physicians "telegraph" data in down-to-earth human terms—is where we can uncover deeper insights into what messages will resonate in the real world.

In our interviews, we routinely ask, "How would you explain this data to a patient or caregiver?" or, "What would you say to a patient to help them understand the benefit of this treatment?" The answers often reveal whether the clinical data is not only understood, but also usable in their daily job context.

‍

Making Biostatistics Accessible: Definitions with Clinical Relevance

Here are many of the core statistical concepts we frequently as moderators encounter in interviews, along with how we translate them for both physicians and patients:

Statistical Significance vs. Directional Trends

• Definition: Statistical significance implies the result demonstrated in a trial is unlikely due to chance (typically p<0.05), while directional data suggests a pattern that doesn’t reach that threshold.
• Moderation Tip: "We often say, 'This trend is promising, but hasn’t yet hit the bar for significance.' Then we ask, 'What do you make of that?' to gauge their tolerance for uncertainty."

Absolute vs. Relative Risk Reduction

• Definition: Relative risk shows percentage change; absolute shows the actual difference. I've heard many physicians, cardiologists in particular, say that they want ARR not RRR.
• Moderation Tip: "We might clarify, 'While this shows a 50% relative reduction, it’s a 2% absolute drop. Does that change how you see the benefit?'"

Number Needed to Treat / Number Needed to Harm

• Definition: NNT is how many patients must be treated to prevent one event; NNH is how many before one adverse effect.
• Moderation Tip: "We ask, 'Is that a reasonable trade-off in your clinical setting?' to see how they weigh benefit versus risk."

P-Value

• Definition: The likelihood the result occurred by chance.
• Moderation Tip: "We might say, 'It’s statistically significant, but does that mean it is clinically meaningful? How do you interpret that?'"

Hazard Ratio

• Definition: Indicates how much the treatment reduces risk over time.
• Moderation Tip: "We explain, 'A hazard ratio of 0.7 means a 30% risk reduction at any given time point,' and check for understanding."

Kaplan-Meier Curves

• Definition: Visualizes survival or time-to-event data.
• Moderation Tip: "We ask, 'What do you take away from this separation?' to assess whether they interpret the curve as clinically impactful."

Confidence Intervals

• Definition: A range of values that express the degree of uncertainty around a result.
• Moderation Tip: "We might say, 'This result is likely to fall within this range. Does that level of precision give you confidence in the outcome?'"

Odds Ratios

• Definition: A measure of association between exposure and outcome.
• Moderation Tip: "We help clarify: 'An odds ratio above 1 suggests a greater chance of the event happening with treatment. Below 1 means less.'"

Median vs. Mean

• Definition: The median is the middle value; the mean is the average.
• Moderation Tip: "We clarify, 'Median avoids distortion by outliers, which is often more representative in clinical outcomes.'"

Sensitivity and Specificity

• Definition: Sensitivity measures how well a test identifies true positives; specificity identifies true negatives.
• Moderation Tip: "We ask, 'Would you rather miss fewer cases or avoid more false positives?' This frames their diagnostic mindset."
• ‍

Insight Comes from Dialogue, Not Just Data

In our interviews, physicians often say they understand the data - certainly no MD would want to admit otherwise - but then their next statement may contradict that. That’s why thoughtful probing is essential. Asking physicians to paraphrase the data in their own words, or to role-play how they would explain it to a patient or caregiver, gives us insight into both comprehension and communication.

It's in these moments that we uncover misinterpretations, hesitations, or even surprising / counterintuitive endorsements of treatments based on intuition rather than numbers.

‍

Engineering Clarity Through Proportionality

Part of our work is about engineering clarity—taking layered data and calibrating it to the physician's mindset with proportionality. That means contextualizing not just the benefit, but the burden: the side effects, the treatment regimen, the monitoring. It's the whole picture, not just one specific datapoint. It's about assessing the total proposition and how it will resonate when that physician has 10 minutes in the exam room to make a case. When physicians speak of value, they're doing so in the context of a compressed mental framework, balancing risks and benefits at speed.

Helping them articulate that balance is one of the dividends of good moderation.

‍

Conclusion: Own the Data, Translate the Story

As moderators immersed in complex therapeutic areas, our job is part scientist, part interpreter, part storyteller. It's like 3D chess. We don’t just ask questions; we translate, guide, and sometimes even educate in real time. When we help physicians bridge the gap between statistical data and clinical relevance—and then into patient-facing language—we unlock powerful insights for our clients.

That is what drives effective messaging, credible positioning, and ultimately better patient outcomes. The mentality we bring to this work is one of intellectual generosity: helping physicians see the signal, not just the noise—and helping our clients understand what will ultimately matter most in the real world of an exam room.

‍