The reason for that is that there are a lot of Pit Bulls in America, and fewer Dobermans—but Doberman Pinschers as a breed are more dangerous. You're citing raw numbers for a breed (Pit Bulls) that is far more common than Doberman Pinschers. The research I cited was regarding the rate of fatal attacks (per 100,000 dogs) of various breeds.
Therefore, to reiterate: if you (or, say, your child) are in the presence of a Doberman Pinscher, that dog is more likely to kill you (or, say, your child) than if you're in the presence of a Pit Bull.
Of course, you're probably more likely to be killed by a Pit Bull—but that's because there are a lot more Pit Bulls around. It's not because individual Pit Bulls are more dangerous than individual Dobermans.
I repeat: Doberman Pinscher's (for example)—as individual animals—are a more dangerous breed than Pit Bulls with respect to fatal attacks on humans. This means that if Doberman Pinschers were as numerous as Pit Bulls, they would cause even more fatalities than Pits!
Got it?
Post your source.
In 2016, according to: http://www.animals24-7.org/2016/07/29/2016-survey-list-of-top-5-u-s-dog-breed-types-ousts-pit-bulls/
In 2016, he Doberman breed amounted to about 1.9% of the dog population of the US. There is little change year over year, it tends to be slow. In order for Dobermans to have a higher “kill rate” than the pit bull types that comprise about 5% of the dog population but cause at least 50% of the deaths by dog attack (at a conservative rate) (i.e., 10x population percentage) of all dog attack deaths in the United States, (i.e., 39 deaths by pit bull mauling in the last year) Dobermans would have to have caused at least 15 deaths by mauling and attack in 2017.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Which they did not. Your figures are incorrect.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++