These are great clinical examples. Fully agree that a huge reason why bad statistical practice remains so prevalent is failure to effectively translate complex statistical concepts into language clinicians will understand. This is the “rate-limiting” step in fixing the problem, yet very few in the statistical community seem to prioritize it. As a result, clinicians are left trying to do the translating themselves, often with very mixed results. But who fields the subsequent criticism? Clinicians.
For example (and stipulating that I appreciate the response), everything after the third bullet point in post #28 of this related thread went right over my (clinician’s) head: Critique of paper on generalizability of oncology trials