Opportunities for Public Health Genetics Trainees: Results of an Employer/Workplace Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To conduct the first employer/workplace survey identifying employment opportunities for graduates of programs with training in public health genetics in the USA, and to determine whether employment opportunities will increase in coming years. METHODS: Six public health genetics training competencies were developed. A survey about workplace and employment opportunities was then conducted with mailings to (1) departments in schools of public health and departments of preventive medicine, (2) local and regional public health officials, (3) insurance companies and health management organizations (HMOs), and (4) biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies. RESULTS: A total of 196 surveys were returned among 1,464 that were mailed. Response rates varied from 5.8 to 46.5% among the target groups. The percent of responding organizations currently employing individuals with skills in genetics ranged from 20 to 62%. The percent currently employing individuals with skills in public health ranged from 39 to 96%. Training opportunities such as internships or practicum experiences are reported for one-third of respondents. For all of the competencies, approximately half of survey respondents who rated the competency important or very important already employ individuals with public health genetics skills. Similarly, at least a quarter of survey respondents who rated the competency important or very important plan to hire individuals with that skill in the next 5 years. Overall, approximately 40% of those surveyed are planning to hire individuals with competencies in public health genetics in the next 5 years. CONCLUSION: Employment opportunities already exist and new positions are becoming available in schools of public health and departments of preventive medicine, departments of public health, insurance companies and HMOs for professionals with public health genetics training. Based on our survey findings, skills and training in public health genetics are important in the workplace.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".