Consideration of Genetic Counseling as a Career: Implications for Diversifying the Genetic Counseling Field
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Under-representation of racial/ethnic minority counselors has been an ongoing issue in the genetic counseling field. A better understanding of genetic counseling awareness and career consideration may help to increase the number of applicants to genetic counseling training programs from racial/ethnic minorities. This study sampled high school and college students (n = 233) to examine their awareness and perceptions of genetic counseling. Ethnicity, gender, parental level of education, and interest in biology were significant predictors of a subject's genetic counseling awareness; previous awareness of genetic counseling, interest in psychology, and level of education were significant predictors of whether a subject would consider genetic counseling as a career. The findings suggest that knowledge of genetic counseling is lower among racial/ethnic minorities, but that racial/ethnic minorities are just as likely to consider genetic counseling as a career. Awareness of genetic counseling prior to university education may increase racial/ethnic minority representation among potential applicants to genetic counseling training programs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it