It's pretty hard to get away from the mercantile habit of assigning stupid fucking Numbers to every -thing and -one. Maybe it's the "when you learn to use a hammer.." syndrome or possibly.. by now, the spreadsheet has done permanent damage to the collective neuronal nexus (?)
[OT: ever look into any of the stuff one Carver Mead (Cal Tech) was doing, trying to synthesize neural networks? Just curious if such material ever gets into the field, actual-workers' territory -- or it's just too surreal..?]
But I think you'll find that most here don't Really 'mean it', y'know?
People who understand how "significant digits" (and their frequent misuse) relate to the precision or probability of some measurement - know better. It's the ones who really Believe that the numbers (never mind their 'units') Mean something re humans : watch out for Those.
But then - you knew that. Right?
(I sure hope that modrin psych or psyche repairfolk don't assign numbers to their charges. Tell me they don't! write stuff like "87.3% paranoid/delusional, 13.26% BPD, ___")
Yours for writing all dossiers in longhand, sans arithmetic - but enough adjectives.
(Ok.. maybe.. a few video clips of the client telling her story. Animatedly.)
PS, re your field - a friend is dealing with a family member who is skirting the territory of bipolar (a term it's difficult ever to use 'with Any precision', I gather from several long-winded essays). She found the book, Stop Walking on Eggshells. It is even in English. Enter: how best to test the pharmchem soups -VS- realizing how little is done ($$ spent) to study the cross-interactions of the many popular soups. Etc.
It is clear that she will be of vastly more importance in any outcome than - the (pridefully way-overbooked) #1 shrink. Fortunately she has also learned tact, the creative evasion of ego-induced testiness. 'Computer Science' is trivial (hell, it's ALL mere logic) compared with This Gig.
Why.. I'd bet it's 87.15% harder than say, designing say, some old Linux kernel?
:-\ufffd