Loading page content
Preparing content…
SOC 29-2036
This page is a directory parent scope covering 19-1041.00 Epidemiologists and 19-1042.00 Medical Scientists, Except Epidemiologists. The former study the distribution and determinants of population health events; the latter focus on human disease and health research, clinical investigations, or related research and development. Use each suboccupation's wage, education, interest, and industry data separately; do not combine them into a parent-occupation median.
Model impact index for three equally weighted representative core tasks; not a measured share of working time or a job-loss probability. floor((50+25+75)/3+0.5)=50; fermatmind-ai-impact-v1; 2026-10-18.
If you are willing to turn questions into testable designs, retain data sources, and explain limitations, continue exploring. The trial on this page uses only the four provided rows of editor-created fictional numbers to observe willingness to recalculate, correct errors, and acknowledge uncertainty. It involves no real participants, biological materials, or restricted data, and one exercise cannot establish long-term research competence. Observable signals: Can you turn vague questions into testable hypotheses, follow protocols and control data quality, distinguish correlation from causation and explain limitations, and stop and escalate first when ethical or safety questions arise? Personality labels cannot determine fit or eligibility.
This page supports career exploration. The exercises below contain only editor-created fictional unitless numbers, not patients, clinical trials, or biological samples; they are neither power calculations nor qualification assessments. Verify actual research against the applicable jurisdiction, institution, research type, and funding conditions. A research degree does not automatically confer authority for diagnosis and treatment, sample handling, or research approval.
This page is a directory parent scope covering 19-1041.00 Epidemiologists and 19-1042.00 Medical Scientists, Except Epidemiologists. The former study the distribution and determinants of population health events; the latter focus on human disease and health research, clinical investigations, or related research and development. Use each suboccupation's wage, education, interest, and industry data separately; do not combine them into a parent-occupation median.
Abilities and work approach: Research design, statistics, and biomedical knowledge; ability to read and write papers and protocols; attention to data quality and reproducibility; and sustained commitment to ethics and standards amid uncertainty and competition.
Career direction comparison
Epidemiology focuses on the distribution and determinants of population events. Non-epidemiology medical scientists study disease, health, and related research and development. They may collaborate, but their statistics remain separate.
| Career direction | Core work and output | Key differences | Best-fit choice |
|---|---|---|---|
| Epidemiology subdirection (already included on this page) | Investigate the distribution and causes of disease and injury in populations, producing surveillance and epidemiological research reports. | This parent scope already includes epidemiology, focusing on the distribution / determinants of population health events and surveillance | If you prefer population / survey data research, compare this direction within the scope |
| Clinical Research Coordinators | Coordinate participants, follow-up, and compliance in clinical research, producing research process and coordination records. |
AI impact on this career
The publication overview of WHO2021 guidance on ethics and governance of AI for health supports discussion of governance and responsibility. It provides no institutional adoption rate, layoff proportion, or replacement date for this parent scope or its two suboccupations. The tool-assistance plan is an editorial hypothesis: Ask a tool to show calculations for the four-row exercise, then manually check means of 6 / 4, a difference of 2, and the inability to make a causal conclusion. Do not enter real patient or restricted data. AI Impact Score 50% is an editorial estimate. Model impact index for three equally weighted representative core tasks; not a measured share of working time or a job-loss probability. floor((50+25+75)/3+0.5)=50; fermatmind-ai-impact-v1; 2026-10-18.The three tasks, ratings and sources are listed in the FermatMind method source record on this page.
FermatMind AI Impact Score estimation method v1
FermatMind / 费马测试 · 2026-10-18
Editorial ratings use the existing occupational responsibilities and AI task analysis on this page. They are not adoption rates, measured effects, job-disappearance or personal-unemployment probabilities, or official scores from Stanford or another external institution. No measured time weights or future robot deployment are assumed.
Chinese mainland salary reference
Scope note: Public wage data are aggregated by industry or broad personnel category. Research and professional technical service means cannot replace wages for this occupation. No proxy figures are used before a precise mapping is established.
Category boundary: zh-CN is only the page language, not evidence that this occupation has an exact mainland Chinese equivalent. Do not extrapolate entry pay, medians, or personal income across jurisdictions from industry means or U.S. wages.
No figures displayed
Insufficient to support precise wages for this occupation
Do not substitute figures for other occupations or generic positions
U.S. wage reference
U.S. data are displayed separately for non-epidemiology 19-1042 and epidemiology 19-1041. Wages are nationwide for 2025, and the new projection period is 2025–2035; these are not combined parent-scope statistics.
| Percentile | Annual wages for the two suboccupations (USD) | Official hourly wages (USD) | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10th percentile | Non-epidemiology $64,800; epidemiology $61,270 | $31.15 / $29.46 per hour, respectively | 2025 10th / 25th / 50th / 75th / 90th percentiles: Non-epidemiology annual wages are $64,800 / $79,840 / $103,410 / $139,380 / $177,780, with official hourly wages of 31.15 / 38.39 / 49.72 / 67.01 / 85.47. Epidemiology annual wages are 61,270 / 71,090 / 87,220 / 112,640 / 138,800, with hourly wages of 29.46 / 34.18 / 41.93 / 54.15 / 66.73. Percentiles are not an experience ladder, starting pay, or take-home wages. |
| Median | Non-epidemiology $103,410; epidemiology $87,220 |
Career fit guide
Assess fit through observable behavior: Can you form testable questions and follow protocols, ensure data quality and reproducibility, and sustain research amid uncertainty and competition?
Positive signals： Willingness to repeatedly check data and methods, follow ethics and recordkeeping standards, and communicate clearly with teams and collaborators.
Reasons for caution： If prolonged uncertainty and competitive pressure are difficult to tolerate, or ethical and compliance responsibilities cause uncomfortable pressure, first compare adjacent directions.
Next trial action： 60-minute paper exercise (editor-created fiction): Nonrandom observational records A1: X=2, Y=4; A2: X=4, Y=8; B1: X=2, Y=3; B2: X=4, Y=5. X / Y are unitless teaching numbers only. Calculate the mean Y for groups A / B and the mean difference A minus B, then decide whether the difference can be described as A causing Y to increase. Retain all four original rows, show calculations, state two limitations, and identify further design information needed. There are no missing values; no new data collection, significance testing, or sample size / power calculation is required. Save descriptive results and two limitations; the reference answer is in the introductory exercise. A difference of 2 cannot establish causation.
Work pressure, risks, and professional boundaries
Assess research risks through design, sources, interpretation, and applicable ethics / safety requirements. The following are responsibility scenarios, not incidence rates.
Tasks support research background; scenario consequences and controls are editorial analysis, not accident rates. Check 45 CFR46 only against applicable research / jurisdiction. CDC BMBL is advisory guidance; NIH DMS is a scientific data policy for applicable funded research. None confers individual permissions. Complete guidelines and specific Chinese regulations were not checked.
Typical scenario：Mismatch between design and method: Interpreting differences without defining groups or measurements may affect conclusions. First check the question, design, and methodological assumptions. Preregistration and power analysis depend on specific research requirements; numerical power calculation is not mandatory for this paper exercise.
Roles most affected：People responsible for the relevant research, analysis, or compliance tasks
Entry, qualifications, and career development
U.S. BLS: Non-epidemiology medical scientists typically need a doctorate or medical degree; some positions accept a master's degree plus experience. Postdoctoral work may follow a doctorate but is not universally required. Research-focused work typically does not require licensure or certification; actual medical practice or treatment of trial patients requires appropriate medical licensure. Epidemiologists typically need at least a master's degree, such as an MPH or a related degree; some hold doctoral or medical degrees. Both are O*NET JobZone5, a preparation group rather than a universal training duration. Certification directories are not legal permission; Chinese requirements need separate checking.
Career outlook and transitions to related occupations
BLS2025–2035: Non-epidemiology employment 181,000 → 203,700, net +22,700, official growth 13%, average annual openings 10,500; epidemiology employment 12,800 → 15,200, net +2,400, official growth 19%, average annual openings 800. Net increases subtract endpoints; official percentages retain the integer scope. Openings include growth and replacement, not current recruitment or individual hiring probabilities. Employment, growth rate, net change, and annual openings must be explained separately and cannot be combined into a personal employment guarantee. Academic and industry positions differ substantially; do not extrapolate across regions. This page has not verified representative recruitment samples. Specific positions require separate checks of posting date, region, research field, and funding conditions. Editorial advice is to check funding continuity and project duration; these cannot establish a nationwide demand rate. The publication overview of WHO2021 guidance on ethics and governance of AI for health supports discussion of governance and responsibility. It provides no institutional adoption rate, layoff proportion, or replacement date for this parent scope or its two suboccupations. The tool-assistance plan is an editorial hypothesis: Ask a tool to show calculations for the four-row exercise, then manually check means of 6 / 4, a difference of 2, and the inability to make a causal conclusion. Do not enter real patient or restricted data. Epidemiology is a subdirection on this page, not an external transition. The eight directory targets below are editorial comparisons. Transferable research recordkeeping / methods communication habits do not establish existing practical experience in target-role experiments, clinical work, or management.
O*NET response options, separated by suboccupation and question: Among non-epidemiology medical scientists, 94% use email daily, 84% have face-to-face discussions daily, 89% rate teamwork as extremely important, 57% rate accuracy as extremely important, 48% typically work more than 40 hours weekly, and 47% face time pressure monthly rather than weekly. Corresponding epidemiologist figures are 95% for email, 67% for face-to-face discussions, 56% for teamwork, 68% for accuracy, 53% for more than 40 hours, and 58% for monthly rather than weekly time pressure. Different questions are not added together; these are neither accident rates nor a Chinese survey. BLS describes the former as mainly working in offices / laboratories; the latter may also work in the field and have irregular hours during public health emergencies.
Choose a real task from this page for a small practice project or a conversation with someone in the field. Use the planning guides to set a date, an output and feedback questions before deciding whether to continue.
To explore fit, first observe whether you are willing to check methods and original values, document limitations, and accept collaborative review. If you dislike the uncertainty of long-term research, compare epidemiology and non-epidemiology within this parent scope, or external directions such as clinical research coordination / laboratory technology. Applicable ethical review depends on research type; it is not mandatory for every paper exercise.
Choose cautiously if you accept only rapid, certain results or are unwilling to repeatedly check original values, methods, and limitations. Compare population and non-epidemiology research within this scope or external coordination / laboratory directions. The paper trial uses only four fictional rows and is not a research qualification assessment.
60-minute paper exercise (editor-created fiction): Nonrandom observational records A1: X=2, Y=4; A2: X=4, Y=8; B1: X=2, Y=3; B2: X=4, Y=5. X / Y are unitless teaching numbers only. Calculate the mean Y for groups A / B and the mean difference A minus B, then decide whether the difference can be described as A causing Y to increase. Retain all four original rows, show calculations, state two limitations, and identify further design information needed. There are no missing values; no new data collection, significance testing, or sample size / power calculation is required. Reference answer: A mean (4+8)/2=6, B mean (3+5)/2=4, A minus B=2. This is a descriptive difference among four fictional records. It cannot establish causation: Groups are nonrandom, each has only 2 records, and sampling, temporal order, and confounders are unspecified. Request grouping criteria, measurement meanings, and study design instead of inventing facts. The exercise cannot establish power, significance, or clinical efficacy. Spend 10 minutes reading, 20 minutes calculating, 20 minutes writing limitations and requests, and 10 minutes redoing it with the answer hidden and saving a corrected version.
First check suboccupation, research question, grouping and measurement meanings, sources / versions, and your own permissions.
Save protocols, original values, calculations or code, results, limitations, and unresolved requests.
Create reviewable records from questions, design, and data sources through analysis, interpretation, and limitations. Statistical power, preregistration, ethical review, and sharing requirements depend on research type and applicable policies; do not treat every item as a universal requirement for all positions.
| Dimension | Primary track | Comparison track |
|---|---|---|
| Step one | Form a testable research question | Questions and hypotheses |
| Step two: Design | Design an experimental or observational protocol | Design and power |
| Step three | Collect and check data | Quality control |
| Step four | Statistical analysis and interpretation | Methods and assumptions |
| Step five | Write and submit papers | Conclusions and authorship |
| Step six | Review conclusions and limitations | Reproduction and sharing |
| Training and qualifications | Verify by position and employer | Education requirements |
Questions and hypotheses: Form testable research questions and hypotheses and conduct literature reviews.
Study design: Plan experimental or observational studies. Methods, feasibility, and power analysis follow actual research requirements; this exercise does not require power calculations.
Data collection and quality: Collect biomedical or population data under a protocol and control quality.
Statistics and analysis: Select suitable methods to clean, model, and analyze data.
Interpretation and writing: Interpret results, distinguish correlation from causation, and write papers.
Ethics and biosafety: Check applicable review / consent or exemptions and actual safety requirements against jurisdiction, research definition, and procedural risks.
Data sharing and compliance: Manage and share research data under institutional policies.
U.S. BLS: Non-epidemiology medical scientists typically need a doctorate or medical degree; some positions accept a master's degree plus experience. Postdoctoral work may follow a doctorate but is not universally required. Research-focused work typically does not require licensure or certification; actual medical practice or treatment of trial patients requires appropriate medical licensure. Epidemiologists typically need at least a master's degree, such as an MPH or a related degree; some hold doctoral or medical degrees. Both are O*NET JobZone5, a preparation group rather than a universal training duration. Certification directories are not legal permission; Chinese requirements need separate checking.
A research degree does not equal authority to diagnose and treat
Not a universal threshold for all positions
Check application conditions and employer requirements separately
| Epidemiology is not an external transition target on this page. For clinical research coordination, the official definition includes planning, directing, or coordinating projects and potentially evaluating and analyzing clinical data; do not categorically state that coordinators do not participate in design. |
| Compare the division between clinical execution and design. |
| Health Informatics Specialists | Locally corresponds to 15-1211.01 Nursing Informatics: Apply nursing and information technology to design, implement, or evaluate nursing information systems | Nursing information system and process responsibilities, not all health data architecture in general | Compare system and data responsibilities. |
|---|
| Microbiologists | Study microorganisms and their interactions with hosts, producing experimental data and papers. | Focuses on microorganism experiments, with research scope and emphasis differing from disease research. | Compare experimental subjects. |
|---|
| Geneticists | Study heredity at molecular, individual, or population levels. Patient assessment / treatment duties may apply; check licensure separately | Compare actual research levels; do not assume a particular molecular experiment is mandatory | Microbiology studies microorganism characteristics, including disease and antibiotic directions. Genetics studies heredity at molecular, individual, or population levels; these fields do not all involve only molecular experiments. Qualifications for treatment responsibilities in target roles need separate checking. |
|---|
| Associated and related occupations | O*NET related occupations also include biochemists, laboratory technologists, and public health positions. | Similar names do not make duties, qualifications, and authorization interchangeable. | Check qualifications and authorization chains individually. |
|---|
Epidemiology is a subdirection within this page's parent scope; clinical research coordination, health informatics, microbiology, and genetics are separately listed targets. First distinguish research subjects, outputs, and authority; similar names do not imply mutual recognition.
Adjacent relationships are for comparing directions only and do not imply automatic transfers or mutual recognition of qualifications.
Software may assist with literature searches, data cleaning, statistical modeling, and drafting. Researchers remain responsible for hypotheses, design, and result interpretation.
No GenAI performance, representative institutional adoption, or causal job outcome evidence was obtained for the parent scope or either suboccupation. The WHO2021 overview provides governance background; specific data rights, applicable review / exemptions, validation, and responsibility need separate checks.
Task exposure does not equal adoption rates, unemployment probabilities, or replacement dates.
| Work area | Task | Current change | Human control point |
|---|---|---|---|
| Questions and hypotheses | Form testable research questions and hypotheses | Editorial hypothesis: Assistance may support literature reviews and hypothesis organization | Researchers confirm question value and testability |
| Experimental design | Design experimental or observational protocols | Editorial hypothesis: Compare protocols; power cannot be calculated from this exercise | Researchers check design; review requirements depend on applicable scope |
| Data collection | Collect biomedical or population data under a protocol | Editorial hypothesis: Check formatting and missing values; this does not authorize collection | Researchers confirm data quality and sources |
| Data analysis | Clean and statistically analyze data | Editorial hypothesis: Assistance may support cleaning, modeling, and visualization | Researchers confirm method suitability and assumptions |
| Result interpretation | Interpret results and distinguish correlation from causation | Editorial hypothesis: Assistance may support pattern recognition and literature comparison | Researchers confirm causal interpretation and limitations |
| Paper writing | Write papers, reports, and presentation materials | Editorial hypothesis: Assistance may support draft generation and language editing | Authors confirm conclusions and authorship responsibility |
| Ethics and compliance | Follow ethics, biosafety, and data sharing standards | Editorial hypothesis: Assistance may support compliance checklists and sharing plans | Researchers and institutions confirm ethics and compliance |
Check three evidence categories separately: Task capability, organizational adoption, and job outcomes cannot substitute for one another.
The assistance scenarios below are editorial hypotheses; institutional adoption in this occupation has not been measured.
AI primarily changesSearch and review assistance
Human responsibility remainsQuestion value and testability
AI primarily changesCleaning, modeling, and visualization
Human responsibility remainsMethod suitability and causal interpretation
AI primarily changesDrafting and language editing
Human responsibility remainsConclusion and authorship responsibility
The human responsibility chain runs from checking inputs and limiting tasks to human review and documented escalation.
Confirm data sources, versions, and ethical approval scope.
Use tools only within validated data and processes.
Researchers confirm methods, results, and limitations.
Follow ethics, biosafety, and data sharing requirements.
Immediately document deviations and exceptions and escalate under procedures.
Affects conclusion validity and reproducibility.
Control: Check design and applicable methods; preregister according to research or funding requirements
May lead to wrong conclusions and wasted resources.
Control: Check against quality controls and version records.
May mislead clinical or policy judgments.
Control: Distinguish correlation from causation and explain limitations.
May violate regulations and participant rights.
Control: Check jurisdiction, research type, and review / consent or exemption status
May endanger personnel and the environment.
Control: Have the institution confirm through procedure-specific risk assessment and applicable standards
Editorial exercise: First calculate the four-row exercise by hand, then ask a tool to show its process. Check means of 6 / 4 and a difference of 2 without interpreting efficacy.
Editorial training suggestion: Save the tool's original output, human corrections, and nonrandom / small-sample limitations. Do not treat software mention rates in recruitment as adoption rates.
Managers can check data rights, validation, and responsible people against actual systems. This page has not obtained representative institutional adoption or net employment surveys.
The publication overview of WHO2021 guidance on ethics and governance of AI for health supports discussion of governance and responsibility. It provides no institutional adoption rate, layoff proportion, or replacement date for this parent scope or its two suboccupations. The tool-assistance plan is an editorial hypothesis: Ask a tool to show calculations for the four-row exercise, then manually check means of 6 / 4, a difference of 2, and the inability to make a causal conclusion. Do not enter real patient or restricted data.
No; O*NET duties define research tasks only.
Source: Official occupational source; paper application is editorial designOriginal source ↗
No; Lightcast measures 2025 job posting mentions, not institutional usage surveys.
Source: Official occupational source; paper application is editorial designOriginal source ↗
The editorial exercise describes only four rows of numbers. Grouping is nonrandom and each group has 2 records, so causation cannot be established.
Source: Official occupational source; paper application is editorial designOriginal source ↗
Distinguish population surveillance from non-epidemiology research; this page presents them separately.
Source: Official occupational source; paper application is editorial designOriginal source ↗
BLS occupational projections do not separately measure AI's causal effects.
Source: Official occupational source; paper application is editorial designOriginal source ↗
19% is a 2025–2035 occupational projection, not a personal probability.
Source: Official occupational source; paper application is editorial designOriginal source ↗
See WHO / CDC / HHS / NIH sources in this page's sources section and verify within their actual scope. O*NET in this row supports research task background only.
Source: Official occupational source; paper application is editorial designOriginal source ↗
When moving from medical science toward adjacent directions, compare transferable capabilities first, then address the target direction's specific knowledge and qualification requirements.
Public duty and skill information can support career exploration but cannot establish wages in the Chinese market.
| Job direction | Data status | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Research training | Research questions and methods | Check the specific position's education / training requirements; do not infer mutual recognition of U.S. degrees |
| Population direction | Surveillance and epidemiology | Check research subjects, sampling, analysis, and local institutional requirements |
| Experimental direction | Disease mechanisms and experimental research | Check methods, facilities, sample permissions, and training |
| Expanded responsibilities | Projects and collaboration | Check funding, ethics, mentoring, and authorization; do not advance by fixed years |
For wage judgments, check the specific city, employer, job level, and published recruitment terms.
Check specific research subjects, training, and funding conditions
Check research, diagnosis and treatment, and population surveillance duties and permissions
Check field, methods, and data rights; no representative recruitment sample was obtained
Insufficient evidence: Nationwide occupational wages for medical scientists in mainland China were not obtained within this round of public-source coverage. This page explicitly marks the gap and does not fill it with industry proxies or U.S. figures.
| $49.72 / $41.93 per hour, respectively |
| Current O*NET and BLS figures both cover 2025–2035, with separate statistics: Non-epidemiology 19-1042 employment rises from 181,000 to 203,700, with official growth of 13%, net increase 22,700, and 10,500 average annual openings. Epidemiology 19-1041 employment rises from 12,800 to 15,200, with official growth of 19%, net increase 2,400, and 800 average annual openings. These are not combined parent-scope statistics. Openings include growth and replacement, not current vacancies / individual hiring probabilities. |
| 90th percentile | Non-epidemiology $177,780; epidemiology $138,800 | $85.47 / $66.73 per hour, respectively | Current O*NET employment industry shares: Non-epidemiology, professional, scientific, and technical services 35%, healthcare and social assistance 33%, education 21%, and other industries including manufacturing 11%. Epidemiology, government 55%, healthcare and social assistance 14%, professional, scientific, and technical services 13%, and other industries including education 18%. These are each suboccupation's employment distribution, not wages or forecasts. BLS2025 median annual epidemiology wages in five industries: R&D 127,410; state / local / private hospitals 104,470; state government excluding education and hospitals 84,410; state colleges, universities, and professional schools 83,700; and local government excluding education and hospitals $80,680. Non-epidemiology's five industries are tabulated separately; do not construct a parent value. |
|---|
10th-percentile wage：Non-epidemiology $64,800; epidemiology $61,270；2025 nationwide； official hourly wages $31.15 / $29.46, respectively
25th-percentile wage：Non-epidemiology $79,840; epidemiology $71,090；2025 nationwide； official hourly wages $38.39 / $34.18, respectively
Median wage：Non-epidemiology $103,410; epidemiology $87,220；2025 nationwide； official hourly wages $49.72 / $41.93, respectively
75th-percentile wage：Non-epidemiology $139,380; epidemiology $112,640；2025 nationwide； official hourly wages $67.01 / $54.15, respectively
90th-percentile wage：Non-epidemiology $177,780; epidemiology $138,800；2025 nationwide； official hourly wages $85.47 / $66.73, respectively
The median wage means approximately half of that suboccupation's national wage distribution is above it and half below: 103,410 for non-epidemiology and $87,220 / year for epidemiology. It is not starting pay, an individual offer, or take-home income. Do not average the two medians into a parent-scope median.
Wages correspond separately to 19-1042 and 19-1041, each with its own national distribution. Do not average medians to construct a parent value. Offers also require checking research field, region, funding, duties, and training; do not extrapolate across regions or suboccupations.
It is the stock of occupational employment, not the number currently being recruited.
Growth projections and annual openings are market signals, not individual hiring probabilities.
| Industry distribution | Non-epidemiology 2025 median annual wage (USD) | How to understand these figures |
|---|---|---|
| Research and development in natural sciences / engineering / life sciences | $125,700 | BLS2025 non-epidemiology suboccupation; the fifth industry, state colleges, universities, and professional schools, is $74,970. Do not mix in epidemiology values |
| Pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturing | $106,800 | BLS2025 non-epidemiology suboccupation; the fifth industry, state colleges, universities, and professional schools, is $74,970. Do not mix in epidemiology values |
| State / local / private hospitals | $98,620 | BLS2025 non-epidemiology suboccupation; the fifth industry, state colleges, universities, and professional schools, is $74,970. Do not mix in epidemiology values |
| Medical and diagnostic laboratories | $81,910 | BLS2025 non-epidemiology suboccupation; the fifth industry, state colleges, universities, and professional schools, is $74,970. Do not mix in epidemiology values |
| State colleges, universities, and professional schools | $74,970 | BLS2025 non-epidemiology suboccupation; do not mix in epidemiology values |
Check suboccupation, research field, methods, and data / sample permissions
Check office / laboratory / field work and emergency hours; national values cannot establish an offer
Check education, methods training, funding stability, medical licensure, and institutional authorization separately
2025 → 2035； net +22,700 / +2,400, respectively
Official integer growth rates； do not change the scope
BLS2025–2035； includes growth and replacement
Which activities do IR and IS describe respectively?
Signals supporting fit: Willingness to repeatedly check data and methods, follow ethical and recordkeeping standards, and sustain research amid uncertainty and competition. Reasons for caution: If prolonged uncertainty is difficult to tolerate or you are unwilling to invest in papers and grant work over the long term, first compare adjacent directions.
Do not use it this way: Interest codes describe activity preferences only and cannot replace actual research tasks, ethical standards, or employer judgment.
Go to the career interest trial and design observationsHow can personality tendencies become observation questions?
Use personality descriptions to form observation questions, then see whether you retain all four original rows, recalculate, and correct errors. This page has no occupation-specific evidence that personality predicts research output.
Do not use it this way: Labels describe tendencies only and cannot replace research training, compliance requirements, or employer judgment.
Go to the career interest trial and design observationsCan type labels determine research qualifications?
Type labels cannot replace design training. Use this exercise to observe whether you can explain nonrandom grouping and the limitation of only 2 records per group.
Do not use it this way: Type labels cannot determine competence in research design and data analysis.
Go to the career interest trial and design observationsHow do you respond to review and differing opinions?
Use only for self-description, without inferring research collaboration, ethical judgment, or hiring effectiveness.
Do not use it this way: Type labels do not establish research collaboration or ethical judgment ability.
Go to the career interest trial and design observationsCan cognitive tests cover research training?
You can observe accuracy of calculations and explanations, but a paper mean exercise is neither an IQ measurement nor evidence of research design qualifications.
Do not use it this way: Tests reflect only some cognitive characteristics and do not cover research experience or compliance judgment.
Go to the career interest trial and design observationsCan EQ establish ability to fulfill ethical or collaborative responsibilities?
Observe responses to review and differing opinions; do not infer research ethics or actual team performance from EQ scores.
Do not use it this way: Tests do not establish teamwork ability or ability to fulfill ethical responsibilities.
Go to the career interest trial and design observationsFits better when: Can form testable questions and design feasible protocols.
Watch for: Editorial comparison: Develop the target role's clinical project coordination, protocol adherence, and personnel management skills; no automatic transfer is implied.
Explore related career: Clinical Research CoordinatorsFits better when: Can collect data under a protocol and control data quality.
Watch for: Editorial comparison: Develop the target role's microbiological research methods and actual facility / training preparation; no automatic transfer is implied.
Explore related career: MicrobiologistsFits better when: Can select suitable methods and explain assumptions.
Watch for: Editorial comparison: Develop the target role's statistical methods, sampling design, and suitability evaluation skills; no automatic transfer is implied.
Explore related career: StatisticiansFits better when: Can distinguish correlation from causation and explain limitations.
Watch for: Editorial comparison: Develop genetic research skills at the target level. Check licensure separately for clinical duties; no automatic transfer is implied.
Explore related career: GeneticistsFits better when: Can follow ethics and biosafety requirements.
Watch for: Editorial comparison: Develop the target role's routine medical testing, supervision, and local qualification requirements; no automatic transfer is implied.
Explore related career: Medical and Clinical Laboratory TechniciansFits better when: Can collaborate with teams and write applications and reports.
Watch for: Editorial comparison: Develop the target role's service operations, personnel, and management responsibilities; no automatic transfer is implied.
Explore related career: Medical and Health Services ManagersIR / IS describe suboccupation activity categories only.
This page has no occupation-specific predictive evidence.
Use the four-row fictional exercise, first stating the question and nonrandom limitations.
Calculate 6 / 4 and difference 2 by hand, then check whether you can explain them clearly.
Ask someone to challenge calculations and inferences using only the exercise, without simulating real approval.
When research design support is missing, retain unresolved questions instead of inventing facts.
Exercises on this page use only the provided fictional numbers.
Actual medical practice requires separate checking of appropriate medical licensure.
BLS describes a possible choice, not a universal threshold.
Save original / corrected versions and your experience, then decide whether to continue training or compare target directions.
How to reduce risk：First check design and methods; preregistration follows applicable requirements
Evidence：Medical Scientists, Except Epidemiologists · Epidemiologists
Typical scenario：Data quality or source problems: During collection and analysis, the trigger is failure to check data against quality controls and version records. This may lead to wrong conclusions and wasted resources. The control is checking against quality controls and version records.
Roles most affected：People responsible for the relevant research, analysis, or compliance tasks
Possible consequence：May affect conclusions, participant rights, or personnel safety; assess by specific scenario
How to reduce risk：Check data against quality controls and version records.
Evidence：Medical Scientists, Except Epidemiologists · Epidemiologists
Typical scenario：Overinterpreted results: During analysis and writing, the trigger is treating correlation as causation or ignoring limitations. This may mislead clinical or policy judgments. The control is distinguishing correlation from causation and explaining limitations.
Roles most affected：People responsible for the relevant research, analysis, or compliance tasks
Possible consequence：May affect conclusions, participant rights, or personnel safety; assess by specific scenario
How to reduce risk：Distinguish correlation from causation and explain limitations.
Evidence：Medical Scientists, Except Epidemiologists · Epidemiologists
Typical scenario：45 CFR46 contains human subject protection rules within its applicable U.S. scope. First check research definition, jurisdiction, and applicable provisions. Exemptions and qualifying consent waivers / alterations exist; do not broadly claim every data analysis requires new IRB review or individual consent. Applicability and documentation follow authorized institutional processes; the author's exercise does not determine exemption for real projects.
Roles most affected：People responsible for the relevant research, analysis, or compliance tasks
Possible consequence：May affect conclusions, participant rights, or personnel safety; assess by specific scenario
How to reduce risk：Use authorized processes to confirm applicability, review / consent, or exemption / alteration status
Evidence：Regulations for protection of human subjects · Medical Scientists, Except Epidemiologists
Typical scenario：The CDC website overview of BMBL, 6th edition, was updated on 2026-03-18. It presents advisory best practices, not regulations, emphasizing risk assessment for specific procedures. This round read the overview and foreword, not the entire manual. Institutional professionals must determine actual facilities, materials, and protection under applicable rules. The paper exercise contains no culture, sampling, isolation, or operating instructions. If data / methods are in doubt, record facts and unresolved items, pause the relevant inference, and obtain confirmation from an authorized person. This page does not instruct handling of real materials.
Roles most affected：People responsible for the relevant research, analysis, or compliance tasks
Possible consequence：May affect conclusions, participant rights, or personnel safety; assess by specific scenario
How to reduce risk：Have the institution handle real materials based on procedure-specific risk assessment
Evidence：Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories, 6th Edition · Medical Scientists, Except Epidemiologists
Typical scenario：Confusing parent-scope suboccupation statistics, external target qualifications, or clinical authority
Roles most affected：Research and collaboration positions
Possible consequence：May cause mismatches between authorization and responsibility.
How to reduce risk：The parent scope includes epidemiology, with separate statistics; external targets require additional training / licensure / authorization
Evidence：Medical Scientists, Except Epidemiologists · Epidemiologists
| Capability stage (not years) | Task | Responsibility boundary | Reviewable evidence | Next step |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Learning under guidance | Participate in literature work, design, and data analysis under guidance | Verify against actual tasks, training, institution, and applicable rules; stage names do not confer permissions | Literature, protocol, and analysis practice records | Discuss expanded scope after passing relevant task evaluations; automatic advancement is not guaranteed |
| Taking on defined tasks | Independently complete routine experimental or observational research and analysis | Verify against actual tasks, training, institution, and applicable rules; stage names do not confer permissions |
U.S. BLS: Non-epidemiology medical scientists typically need a doctorate or medical degree; some positions accept a master's degree plus experience. Postdoctoral work may follow a doctorate but is not universally required. Research-focused work typically does not require licensure or certification; actual medical practice or treatment of trial patients requires appropriate medical licensure. Epidemiologists typically need at least a master's degree, such as an MPH or a related degree; some hold doctoral or medical degrees. Both are O*NET JobZone5, a preparation group rather than a universal training duration. Certification directories are not legal permission; Chinese requirements need separate checking.
Education
Editorial verification suggestion: Check actual task contributions, methods, data sources, and reviewable material. This page has not verified a representative employer recruitment sample.
Experience
45 CFR46 contains human subject protection rules within its applicable U.S. scope. First check research definition, jurisdiction, and applicable provisions. Exemptions and qualifying consent waivers / alterations exist; do not broadly claim every data analysis requires new IRB review or individual consent. Applicability and documentation follow authorized institutional processes; the author's exercise does not determine exemption for real projects. NIH DMS applies from 2023-01-25 according to application / agreement dates specified in the policy, covering research funded or conducted wholly or partly by NIH that generates scientific data. It is not a universal obligation for all research or all materials worldwide. Check applicability, sharing limits, and plans. The scientific data definition does not include all laboratory notes, correspondence, or physical samples. This round read the policy overview.
Only four rows of unitless numbers: State the research question, nonrandom grouping, and missing design information. Do not fabricate power / preregistration evidence
Retain the four original rows, manual calculations or code for means 6 / 4 and difference 2, and correction records
State small-sample / nonrandom limitations and requests for grouping / measurement information. These are not IRB, informed consent, funding, or data sharing approval documents
| Scenario | Action | Review | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Before the interview | Prepare a research explanation using the provided four-row fictional exercise | Ask someone to challenge methods and interpretation | Protocol and analysis samples |
| During the interview | Explain how to control data quality and reproducibility | Have the interviewer confirm the reasoning behind conclusions | Explanation of conclusions and limitations |
| After entering an actual position (not a universal probation period) | Complete design and analysis tasks under guidance |
Spend 30–60 minutes daily reusing the same exercise: Read the four fictional rows and note that they are unitless and nonrandom
Spend 30–60 minutes daily reusing the same exercise: List the question, Y measure, and missing design information
Spend 30–60 minutes daily reusing the same exercise: Retain all four original rows and check X / Y row by row
Spend 30–60 minutes daily reusing the same exercise: Calculate A mean 6, B mean 4, and difference 2 by hand; do not calculate efficacy or power
Spend 30–60 minutes daily reusing the same exercise: State at least two limitations and request grouping / measurement support
Spend 30–60 minutes daily reusing the same exercise: Recalculate with the reference answer hidden; ask someone to challenge causal statements using only the exercise
| Status | Documentation | Source | Conditions | Boundary | Responsible party | Next step |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Education | Non-epidemiology typically requires a doctorate / medical degree, with some positions accepting a master's plus experience; epidemiology typically requires at least a master's | Employers and educational institutions | Verify by research field | Education does not equal institutional authorization | Employer | Check job requirements |
| If the position requires postdoctoral training |
Typical scope：Participate in literature and hypothesis organization under guidance.
Readiness evidence：Retain literature and protocol practice records.
Credential boundary：Verify against the specific jurisdiction, institution, and employer rules.
Next moves：Discuss expanded scope after task evaluation and actual permission confirmation; advancement is not guaranteed
Typical scope：Independently design routine experimental or observational protocols.
Readiness evidence：Present protocol and review records. Preregistration follows actual research / funding requirements only and is not a universal threshold.
Credential boundary：Verify against the specific jurisdiction, institution, and employer rules.
Next moves：Discuss expanded scope after task evaluation and actual permission confirmation; advancement is not guaranteed
Typical scope：Take responsibility for study design and power evaluation.
Readiness evidence：Present study design and review records.
Credential boundary：Verify against the specific jurisdiction, institution, and employer rules.
Next moves：Discuss expanded scope after task evaluation and actual permission confirmation; advancement is not guaranteed
Typical scope：Review and mentor design within authorized scope.
Readiness evidence：Present mentoring and review records.
Credential boundary：Verify against the specific jurisdiction, institution, and employer rules.
Next moves：Discuss expanded scope after task evaluation and actual permission confirmation; advancement is not guaranteed
Typical scope：Learn statistics and data management.
Readiness evidence：Retain analysis practice records.
Credential boundary：Verify against the specific jurisdiction, institution, and employer rules.
Next moves：Discuss expanded scope after task evaluation and actual permission confirmation; advancement is not guaranteed
Typical scope：Independently clean data and conduct statistical analysis.
Readiness evidence：Present analysis scripts and result records.
Credential boundary：Verify against the specific jurisdiction, institution, and employer rules.
Next moves：Discuss expanded scope after task evaluation and actual permission confirmation; advancement is not guaranteed
Typical scope：Take responsibility for analytical methods and reproducibility.
Readiness evidence：Present method explanations and reproduction records.
Credential boundary：Verify against the specific jurisdiction, institution, and employer rules.
Discuss expanded scope after task evaluation and actual permission confirmation; advancement is not guaranteed
Typical scope：Learn ethics, biosafety, and data sharing requirements.
Readiness evidence：Retain compliance practice records.
Credential boundary：Verify against the specific jurisdiction, institution, and employer rules.
Next moves：Discuss expanded scope after task evaluation and actual permission confirmation; advancement is not guaranteed
Typical scope：Independently follow compliance and recordkeeping requirements.
Readiness evidence：Present approval and record checklists.
Credential boundary：Verify against the specific jurisdiction, institution, and employer rules.
Next moves：Discuss expanded scope after task evaluation and actual permission confirmation; advancement is not guaranteed
Typical scope：Participate in compliance and sharing process improvements.
Readiness evidence：Present compliance improvement and corrective action records.
Credential boundary：Verify against the specific jurisdiction, institution, and employer rules.
Capability progression: Before entering this occupation, check official occupational scope, actual employer requirements, education and training, local research ethics and data compliance rules, and supervised tasks. Advancement rests on reviewable design, data, publication, and compliance records, not a guaranteed number of years.
Conduct experimental or observational research under protocols and control quality.
Complete statistical analysis, result interpretation, and paper writing.
Expand mentoring, review, and compliance responsibilities within authorized scope.
United States, nationwide · 19-1042 Medical Scientists, Except Epidemiologists; see the text and U.S. two-suboccupation table separately for 19-1041
$103,410
Median annual wage (May 2025)
National non-epidemiology median wage, not starting pay
Does not establish：Not combined into parent-scope statistics or personal probabilities
United States, nationwide · 19-1042 Medical Scientists, Except Epidemiologists; see the text and U.S. two-suboccupation table separately for 19-1041
10,500 per year
Average annual openings
2025–2035 average annual openings include growth and replacement, not current vacancies
Does not establish：Not combined into parent-scope statistics or personal probabilities
United States, nationwide · 19-1042 Medical Scientists, Except Epidemiologists; see the text and U.S. two-suboccupation table separately for 19-1041
181,000 → 203,700; net +22,700; officially 13%
Employment size and change
Non-epidemiology suboccupation projection; subtract endpoints for net increase
Does not establish：Not combined into parent-scope statistics or personal probabilities
These are capability relationships, not automatic promotions or credential waivers.
Transfers：Editorial comparison: Research recordkeeping, method review, and communication habits may transfer; do not infer existing practical competence in the target role
Build next：Develop target-role clinical project coordination, protocol adherence, and personnel management skills; check job qualifications and institutional permissions separately
View career profileTransfers：Editorial comparison: Research recordkeeping, method review, and communication habits may transfer; do not infer existing practical competence in the target role
Build next：Develop target-role nursing information system design, implementation / evaluation, and nursing workflow skills; check job qualifications and institutional permissions separately
View career profileTransfers：Editorial comparison: Research recordkeeping, method review, and communication habits may transfer; do not infer existing practical competence in the target role
Build next：Develop target-role microbiological research methods and actual facility / training preparation; check job qualifications and institutional permissions separately
View career profileTransfers：Editorial comparison: Research recordkeeping, method review, and communication habits may transfer; do not infer existing practical competence in the target role
Build next：Develop genetic research skills at the target level. Check licensure separately for clinical duties, and check job qualifications and institutional permissions separately
View career profileTransfers：Editorial comparison: Research recordkeeping, method review, and communication habits may transfer; do not infer existing practical competence in the target role
Build next：Develop target-role chemical / physical methods for life processes; check job qualifications and institutional permissions separately
View career profileTransfers：Editorial comparison: Research recordkeeping, method review, and communication habits may transfer; do not infer existing practical competence in the target role
Build next：Develop target-role statistical methods, sampling design, and suitability evaluation skills; check job qualifications and institutional permissions separately
View career profileTransfers：Editorial comparison: Research recordkeeping, method review, and communication habits may transfer; do not infer existing practical competence in the target role
Build next：Develop target-role service operations, personnel, and management responsibilities; check job qualifications and institutional permissions separately
View career profileTransfers：Editorial comparison: Research recordkeeping, method review, and communication habits may transfer; do not infer existing practical competence in the target role
Build next：Develop target-role routine medical testing, supervision, and local qualification requirements; check job qualifications and institutional permissions separately
View career profileThis parent scope includes epidemiology. External target CRC roles may plan / direct / coordinate projects and analyze data. Health informatics concerns nursing information systems, not all data architecture in general.
Observe willingness to check original values, recalculate 6 / 4 / 2, save corrected versions, and explain nonrandom / small-sample limitations. O*NET IR for non-epidemiology and IS for epidemiology describe activity categories only and do not establish individual competence or qualifications.
The publication overview of WHO2021 guidance on ethics and governance of AI for health supports discussion of governance and responsibility. It provides no institutional adoption rate, layoff proportion, or replacement date for this parent scope or its two suboccupations. The tool-assistance plan is an editorial hypothesis: Ask a tool to show calculations for the four-row exercise, then manually check means of 6 / 4, a difference of 2, and the inability to make a causal conclusion. Do not enter real patient or restricted data.
Editorial application suggestion: Researchers check questions and methods, original values / sources, descriptive results, and limitations. The exercise's difference of 2 cannot establish causation. Applicable institutional processes and responsible people confirm real human research, material safety, and sharing. The WHO governance overview provides neither personal permission nor occupational adoption rates.
This page has not obtained nationwide Chinese wages with matching scope and does not claim that no data exist nationwide.
2025 10th / 25th / 50th / 75th / 90th percentiles: Non-epidemiology annual wages are $64,800 / $79,840 / $103,410 / $139,380 / $177,780, with official hourly wages of 31.15 / 38.39 / 49.72 / 67.01 / 85.47. Epidemiology annual wages are 61,270 / 71,090 / 87,220 / 112,640 / 138,800, with hourly wages of 29.46 / 34.18 / 41.93 / 54.15 / 66.73. Percentiles are not an experience ladder, starting pay, or take-home wages.
U.S. BLS: Non-epidemiology medical scientists typically need a doctorate or medical degree; some positions accept a master's degree plus experience. Postdoctoral work may follow a doctorate but is not universally required. Research-focused work typically does not require licensure or certification; actual medical practice or treatment of trial patients requires appropriate medical licensure. Epidemiologists typically need at least a master's degree, such as an MPH or a related degree; some hold doctoral or medical degrees. Both are O*NET JobZone5, a preparation group rather than a universal training duration. Certification directories are not legal permission; Chinese requirements need separate checking.
45 CFR46 contains human subject protection rules within its applicable U.S. scope. First check research definition, jurisdiction, and applicable provisions. Exemptions and qualifying consent waivers / alterations exist; do not broadly claim every data analysis requires new IRB review or individual consent. Applicability and documentation follow authorized institutional processes; the author's exercise does not determine exemption for real projects. A degree does not equal medical licensure or actual research permissions. Research-focused non-epidemiology work typically does not require licensure; actual medical practice or treatment of trial patients requires separate checks of medical licensure.
The CDC website overview of BMBL, 6th edition, was updated on 2026-03-18. It presents advisory best practices, not regulations, emphasizing risk assessment for specific procedures. This round read the overview and foreword, not the entire manual. Institutional professionals must determine actual facilities, materials, and protection under applicable rules. The paper exercise contains no culture, sampling, isolation, or operating instructions. Unclear data sources or describing correlation as causation also require pausing inference, documenting issues, and reviewing. This is not guidance for handling real samples.
BLS2025–2035: Non-epidemiology employment 181,000 → 203,700, net +22,700, official growth 13%, average annual openings 10,500; epidemiology employment 12,800 → 15,200, net +2,400, official growth 19%, average annual openings 800. Net increases subtract endpoints; official percentages retain the integer scope. Openings include growth and replacement, not current recruitment or individual hiring probabilities.
60-minute paper exercise (editor-created fiction): Nonrandom observational records A1: X=2, Y=4; A2: X=4, Y=8; B1: X=2, Y=3; B2: X=4, Y=5. X / Y are unitless teaching numbers only. Calculate the mean Y for groups A / B and the mean difference A minus B, then decide whether the difference can be described as A causing Y to increase. Retain all four original rows, show calculations, state two limitations, and identify further design information needed. There are no missing values; no new data collection, significance testing, or sample size / power calculation is required. Reference answer: A mean (4+8)/2=6, B mean (3+5)/2=4, A minus B=2. This is a descriptive difference among four fictional records. It cannot establish causation: Groups are nonrandom, each has only 2 records, and sampling, temporal order, and confounders are unspecified. Request grouping criteria, measurement meanings, and study design instead of inventing facts. The exercise cannot establish power, significance, or clinical efficacy. Spend 10 minutes reading, 20 minutes calculating, 20 minutes writing limitations and requests, and 10 minutes redoing it with the answer hidden and saving a corrected version.
FermatMind editorial check: Separate suboccupation facts, governance, and paper hypotheses
Accessed in this round on 2026-10-11
O*NET two suboccupations; BLS 2025 wages and 2025–2035 projections by suboccupation; WHO / CDC / HHS / NIH within applicable scope
Limitations：Excludes epidemiologists; does not support Chinese wages or regulations.
Limitations：Advisory best practices, not regulations; specific facilities still require assessment by pathogen, procedure, and jurisdictional rules.
Limitations：Applicability depends on research, funding, and regulatory jurisdiction; these are not universal global rules or individual legal advice.
Limitations：Industry means, not medical scientists' occupational medians; urban-unit coverage has limits.
Limitations：Applies to research covered by NIH policy, not a global rule for all employers or all data.
Limitations：Does not represent non-epidemiology or Chinese occupations
Limitations：Suboccupation 19-1042; does not represent the entire parent scope
Limitations：Use only for the stated O*NET occupation, US market and page subject. It does not establish a China mapping, China pay, or legal authorization.
Limitations：Use only for the stated O*NET occupation, US market and page subject. It does not establish a China mapping, China pay, or legal authorization.
Limitations：Use only for the stated O*NET occupation, US market and page subject. It does not establish a China mapping, China pay, or legal authorization.
Limitations：Use only for the stated O*NET occupation, US market and page subject. It does not establish a China mapping, China pay, or legal authorization.
Limitations：Use only for the stated O*NET occupation, US market and page subject. It does not establish a China mapping, China pay, or legal authorization.
Limitations：19-1041 program directory including related CIP categories, not 373 proofs of entry qualification
Limitations：19-1041, U.S. nationwide occupation-specific figures, not a combined parent value
Limitations：Does not represent non-epidemiology or Chinese occupations
Limitations：Global governance guidelines do not measure medical scientists' automation rates, adoption rates, or employment effects.
Limitations：19-1041: This round checked education, 2025 wages / industries, and 2025–2035 employment; does not represent 19-1042
Limitations：All five 2025 nationwide 19-1042 annual / hourly wage percentiles; not combined into parent wages
Limitations：Suboccupation 19-1042 projections, not combined parent figures or individual hiring probabilities.
Limitations：Suboccupation 19-1042 employment distribution, not combined parent figures or wages.
Limitations：15 entries read: Excel6%, Office/R5%, PowerPoint4%, Word2%, MATLAB/Python1%; SAS / SPSS below 1%, and 6 entries with no percentage. Recruitment mentions, not adoption rates
Limitations：Target definitions read in this work session; editorial suggestions do not imply mutual qualification recognition
Limitations：Target definitions read in this work session; editorial suggestions do not imply mutual qualification recognition
Limitations：Target definitions read in this work session; editorial suggestions do not imply mutual qualification recognition
Limitations：Target definitions read in this work session; editorial suggestions do not imply mutual qualification recognition
Limitations：Target definitions read in this work session; editorial suggestions do not imply mutual qualification recognition
Limitations：Target definitions read in this work session; editorial suggestions do not imply mutual qualification recognition
Limitations：Target definitions read in this work session; editorial suggestions do not imply mutual qualification recognition
Limitations：Target definitions read in this work session; editorial suggestions do not imply mutual qualification recognition
Limitations：Editorial ratings use the existing occupational responsibilities and AI task analysis on this page. They are not adoption rates, measured effects, job-disappearance or personal-unemployment probabilities, or official scores from Stanford or another external institution. No measured time weights or future robot deployment are assumed.
This round separately checked both suboccupations' five wage percentiles / hourly wages, 14 / 17 tasks, IR / IS, work context, JobZone5, and 15 / 14 recruitment software entries, retaining correct content. Current O*NET now shares BLS's 2025–2035 period: non-epidemiology 181000 to 203700 / 13% / 22700 / 10500; epidemiology 12800 to 15200 / 19% / 2400 / 800. No parent value was constructed. Employment industry shares were updated to 35 / 33 / 21 / 11 and 55 / 14 / 13 / 18. The five detailed industry wages for each suboccupation matched; non-epidemiology's fifth row was added to the table. Epidemiology's 3 certifications / 373 mixed programs are discovery only. This round checked the WHO2021 overview, CDC 6th edition overview / foreword, NIH applicability overview, and 45CFR46 applicability / exemption / consent provisions, without reading complete guidelines. Precise Chinese wages, employer samples, and measured GenAI evidence were not obtained. The original four-row exercise / answer / work samples / seven-day trial and shared FAQs were retained; no independent PASS is signed.
Explore MBTI in English · Explore the Big Five in English · Explore MBTI in Chinese · Explore the Big Five in Chinese
Exemption or alteration provisions exist; use authorized processes
BMBL advisory guidance is not legal permission
NIH policy does not establish a global rule
| Discuss expanded scope after passing relevant task evaluations; automatic advancement is not guaranteed |
| Design and methods responsibility | Take responsibility for study design and power evaluation | Verify against actual tasks, training, institution, and applicable rules; stage names do not confer permissions | Design and review records | Discuss expanded scope after passing relevant task evaluations; automatic advancement is not guaranteed |
|---|
| Project and collaboration responsibility | Independently lead a research direction and guide team members | Verify against actual tasks, training, institution, and applicable rules; stage names do not confer permissions | Publication, funding, and mentoring records | Discuss expanded scope after passing relevant task evaluations; automatic advancement is not guaranteed |
|---|
| Mentoring and review | Lead standards and review within authorized scope | Verify against actual tasks, training, institution, and applicable rules; stage names do not confer permissions | Standards and review records | Discuss expanded scope after passing relevant task evaluations; automatic advancement is not guaranteed |
|---|
Boundary
| Protocol and result records |
| Stage evaluation (position-specific) | Make research contributions within the confirmed task scope and discuss expanded responsibility after review | Have the responsible person confirm contributions and standards | Paper and compliance records |
|---|
Spend 30–60 minutes daily reusing the same exercise: Save the original / corrected versions and your experience, then decide whether to continue / stop / compare targets
| Research institution |
| BLS describes a possible path; check the specific position, not a universal requirement |
| Training does not equal independent research leadership |
| Research institution |
| Check training scope |
| Ethics training | Research ethics and compliance training | Institution or institutional review board | Verify under institutional requirements | Training does not equal approval | Institutional review board | Check training validity |
|---|
| Data compliance | Data management and sharing plan | Institution and funder | For NIH-funded / conducted research generating scientific data, check policy dates and applicability; check other funding separately | A plan does not equal authorization | Institution and funder | Check applicable scope |
|---|
| Institutional authorization | Research authorization and permission descriptions | Employer | Verify under institutional procedures | Authorization does not equal clinical judgment authority | Employer | Check the authorization chain |
|---|
| When human research rules apply | Applicability, review / consent, or exemption / alteration records | Ethics review board | Check research type, jurisdiction, and authorized processes; not all paper / data activities require uniform approval | Approval does not equal treatment authorization | Ethics review board | Confirm under the process |
|---|
Typical scope：Review and mentor analysis within authorized scope.
Readiness evidence：Present analysis review and mentoring records.
Credential boundary：Verify against the specific jurisdiction, institution, and employer rules.
Next moves：Discuss expanded scope after task evaluation and actual permission confirmation; advancement is not guaranteed
Next moves：Discuss expanded scope after task evaluation and actual permission confirmation; advancement is not guaranteed
Typical scope：Maintain standards within authorized scope.
Readiness evidence：Present standards and training records.
Credential boundary：Verify against the specific jurisdiction, institution, and employer rules.
Next moves：Discuss expanded scope after task evaluation and actual permission confirmation; advancement is not guaranteed
