{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026722338204592903, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005845511482254697, 'mean_word_length': 5.564383561643836, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Medicine is politics.

In an accompanying article in this issue of the Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, Shahram Shahangian, PhD, and colleagues have put forth, in ‘‘Trends in Laboratory Test Volumes for Medicare Part B Reimbursements, 2000–2010,’’ data regarding the changes in the volume of frequently ordered laboratory tests. Along with the data, the authors provide reasonable interpretations and explanations of their findings, for example, the identified decreased use of lithium testing being due to the increased use of newer, more effective, better-tolerated antidepressants. The study provides evidence-based literature showing real trends in laboratory testing, which can confidently be used in the health policy arena. Their study, heavy with data and charts, is a good example of the kind of literature— evidence-based—that needs to be produced to most effectively inform health policy. The authors note the study’s limitations: it only examines, during one decade, changes in laboratory test ordering patterns for tests with a greater than 50% change in test reimbursement, for patients older than 65 years enrolled in Medicare Part B. These limitations, however—practical necessities of the study—do nothing to detract from the study. Patients older than 65 years are a major sector of the health care population, and a significant number of laboratory tests are performed on that population; therefore, this study is a very reasonable proxy for laboratory testing performed in all older patients. For the purposes of informing health care policy arguments, the study’s data and explanations regarding changes in the ordering of laboratory tests is extremely valuable. Pathologists have long understood the value of evidencebased medical literature; in fact, modern pathology practice depends on it. Unfortunately, legislators addressing health policy issues in statehouses and on Capitol Hill are too often provided with only anecdotal evidence and stories; indeed, significant health policy decisions are sometimes made on little else. Evidence-based health policy research literature is greatly needed to inform all types of health policy debate— scientific, legal, ethical, and financial—and can provide legislators with the tangible, citable, influential medical information they need to effectively address health care issues and make appropriate policy changes.