MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587016026

To Be a Clinical or Non-Clinical Genetic Counselor, That is the Question

2016· dissertation· en· W2587016026 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stacey Liberman

Bibliographic record

VenueBrandeis Institutional Repository · 2016
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccreditationWorkforcePosition (finance)Genetic counselingMedicineMedical educationPsychologyFamily medicinePolitical scienceBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many genetic counselors are leaving or considering leaving their clinical positions for non-clinical positions. This comes at a time when there is an increasing need for clinical genetic counselors. A serious concern facing the genetic counseling profession is ensuring that there will be an adequate workforce both in supply and skills needed for existing and emerging roles. The purpose of this study was to determine what types of positions genetic counselors plan to take and what impacts their decisions. Two-hundred seventy-seven current genetic counseling students and 440 individuals who recently graduated from an accredited US or Canadian genetic counseling master’s degree program between 2010 and 2015 completed our anonymous online survey. Overall, both groups consider working in clinical and non-clinical roles. Specifically, 72.6% of graduates (N=408) currently hold or previously held a clinical position, and 95.4% of students (N=263) indicated they will likely pursue a clinical position during their career. Reasons cited for considering or pursuing clinical positions included wanting to provide direct patient care, desiring the job responsibilities and characteristics and seeing a clinical position as a necessary first step to gain experience before moving to a non-clinical position. About 31% of graduates (N=411) reported that they currently work or previously worked in a non-clinical setting. In addition, 52.4% of graduates who have not yet held a non-clinical position (N=227) and 66% of students (N=265) believe they will likely work in a non-clinical setting during their career. The higher salary, flexibility, opportunities for new challenges, professional growth and respect associated with non-clinical positions were the primary reasons for considering or pursuing these roles. It is important for the genetic counseling profession to develop strategic plans to lessen the number of genetic counselors vacating clinical positions and to increase the supply of genetic counselors to meet the increasing demand for both clinical and non-clinical counselors.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.007

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.341 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrandeis Institutional RepositorySame topicBRCA gene mutations in cancerFrench-language works237,207