No it's not! If it is a controlled study with specific percentages, it is very much statistical evidence.
*Edit:
I thought of the wrong L and D (learning and development).
A nurse's testimony is definitely still anecdotal if it is not a part of a rigorous scientific process.
To be fair, there probably is some level of advanced training around things like that available to nurses in the field that might make them more likely to have that knowledge.
Also, her repeated observation is technically anecdotal, but still holds more weight than someone who only has one related experience. For this reason I don't think the term anecdotal is very useful here. Its kind of used as this "gotcha, your information is invalid" moment. The thing is that some people's anecdotes have more value on a topic than others.
A delivery nurse is going to deliver a lot of babies. Their experience might not be as thorough as scientific research.
But the volume of raw is going to be higher than some studies. Studies about this topic aren't considered anecdotal, even if their sample size is actually lower than someone's anecdotal experience.
I saw one study that had a sample size of 500 families, less than many l and d nurses deliver in a year.
this blog article talks a bit about the disconnect between practitioner knowledge and published research. Oftentimes practitioners notice trends and phenomenon before researchers have even caught a whiff.
101
u/Ucklator Apr 24 '26
That's the definition of anecdotal.