ArticleGenetics in medicine open2023
Exploring current challenges in the technologist workforce of clinical genomics laboratories.
Article in Genetics in medicine open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The CDC/APHL next generation sequencing quality initiative: practical guidance to implementing quality management systems in laboratories performing next generation sequencing (phase 2).Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Review
- Integrated genomic analysis to reduce chromosomal analysis for the diagnosis of pediatric hematologic malignancies: addressing the shortage of cytogenetic technologists.Haematologica · 2025Article
- Review
- Incorporating automation in a cytogenetics laboratory: three practitioners' perspectives on benefits and limitations.Molecular cytogenetics · 2025Review
- Review
- The Next-Generation Sequencing Quality Initiative and Challenges in Clinical and Public Health Laboratories.Emerging infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Hi-C Sequencing for Detection of Gene Fusions in Hematologic and Solid Tumor Pediatric Cancer Samples.Cancers · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Workforce shortages are observed in many sectors of the economy, including clinical genomics laboratories. Although medical technologists are essential for the primary functions of laboratory operations and many institutions in the United States have reported acute staff shortages, we are unaware of any recent studies that provide concrete data detailing workforce needs. In this report, we summarize the results of a technologist-based survey sent to clinical laboratory directors across the United States. Methods: The survey was designed to provide detailed and objective evidence on the current landscape of the technologist workforce in clinical cytogenetics, molecular genetics, and laboratories that have combined both disciplines. Survey questions included demographics, salaries across career stages, retention trends, and hiring requirements and challenges. Results: Analysis of the survey data from 70 US-based submissions showed that cytogenetics laboratories had higher proportion of unfilled technologist positions, whereas molecular laboratories had more applications for each open positions. The technologist retention rate in molecular laboratories was higher than that in cytogenetics. The lack of adequately trained applicants and competitive salary offers by other laboratories were cited as top barriers for filling technologist positions. Conclusion: The results from this survey will serve as normative data in generating solutions to address acute workforce needs in the United States.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.