Will AI replace Acupuncturists?

Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 18 official task statements scored for Acupuncturists (United States, SOC 29-1291), 6% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 20 out of 100 (range 16–26, band: low). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.

Which tasks in “Acupuncturists” can AI already do?

The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Maintain detailed and complete records of health care plans and prognoses” (66/100, high); “Consider Western medical procedures in health assessment, health care team communication, and care referrals” (48/100, partial); “Collect medical histories and general health and lifestyle information from patients” (42/100, partial). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.

Which tasks in “Acupuncturists” stay human?

About 82% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Insert needles to provide acupuncture treatment” (0/100, minimal); “Treat medical conditions, using techniques such as acupressure, shiatsu, or tuina” (0/100, minimal); “Apply heat or cold therapy to patients using materials, such as heat pads, hydrocollator packs, warm compresses, cold compresses, heat lamps, or vapor coolants” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.

What should someone working in “Acupuncturists” do about AI?

Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 6% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 82% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.

How is the AI exposure score for Acupuncturists calculated?

Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 18 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

US dataswitch to UK

Acupuncturists

maintaining and following standard quality, collecting medical histories and general health and lifestyle information from patients and evaluating treatment outcomes and recommending new or altered treatments as necessary to further promote. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: treating patients using tools, such as needles, cups, ear balls, seeds, pellets or nutritional supplements is work software can't reach.

Your move: what you can actually do about this ↓

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 6%
changing shape: 12%
staying human: 82%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

Whole-job exposure score 20 out of 100 (16–26 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, across 18 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.

How we know this

What is measured: Every published task statement for acupuncturists is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-05. Read the full method.

What shifts is maintaining detailed and completing records of health care plans and prognoses. This page scores what today's tools actually do, not headlines.

Your week, as this page understands it

Diagnose, treat, and prevent disorders by stimulating specific acupuncture points within the body using acupuncture needles. May also use cups, nutritional supplements, therapeutic massage, acupressure, and other alternative health therapies. The job title says “acupuncturists”. The real job is the part underneath: treating patients using tools, such as needles, cups, ear balls, seeds, pellets or nutritional supplements. That is the thing someone has to be right about.

The exposed part of this job is specific, and we won’t pretend it is coming back. But acupuncturists is not one task. It is 18 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is treating patients using tools, such as needles, cups, ear balls, seeds, pellets or nutritional supplements, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 6%
changing shape: 12%
staying human: 82%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

How we know this

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-05. Read the full method.

Your job, task by task

These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.

2 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Shifting to AI

1 task

Tasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.

Maintaining detailed and completing records of health care plans and prognoses
This is reading one thing and writing another: detailed in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Maintain detailed and complete records of health care plans and prognoses.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (62–70 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Keeping full written records of plans and prognoses is desk work that software already handles well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Changing shape

2 tasks

Tasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.

Collecting medical histories and general health and lifestyle information from patients
The software now makes the first pass at medical histories, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Collect medical histories and general health and lifestyle information from patients.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 42 out of 100 (38–46 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Online intake forms and chat tools already gather health and lifestyle histories reliably before an appointment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Considering Western medical procedures in health assessment
The software now makes the first pass at western medical procedures, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Consider Western medical procedures in health assessment, health care team communication, and care referrals.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 48 out of 100 (41–55 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Conventional medical guidance and referral pathways are well documented, so software can weigh them, with a clinician confirming.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Staying human

15 tasks

Tasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.

Maintaining and following standard quality
This work happens in the physical world: standard quality, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Maintain and follow standard quality, safety, environmental, and infection control policies and procedures.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 25 out of 100 (18–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Software can draft and track the safety and infection-control rules, but half of following them is physical work in the treatment room.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Adhering to local, state and federal laws, regulations and statutes
This work happens in the physical world: local, state and federal laws, regulations and statutes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Adhere to local, state, and federal laws, regulations, and statutes.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 29 out of 100 (22–36 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Rules and licence conditions are all written down, so software can track them, though staying compliant day to day is the practitioner's own conduct.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Treating patients using tools, such as needles, cups, ear balls, seeds, pellets or nutritional supplements
This work happens in the physical world: patients, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Treat patients using tools, such as needles, cups, ear balls, seeds, pellets, or nutritional supplements.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Placing needles, cups or pellets on someone's body is hands-on work software cannot do.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Identifying correct anatomical and proportional point locations based on patients' anatomy and positions
This work happens in the physical world: correct anatomical, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Identify correct anatomical and proportional point locations based on patients' anatomy and positions, contraindications, and precautions related to treatments, such as intradermal needles, moxibustion, electricity, guasha, or bleeding.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 4 out of 100 (0–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Finding the right points depends on feeling a specific person's body, which software cannot do for you.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Developing individual treatment plans and strategies
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for individual treatment plans, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Develop individual treatment plans and strategies.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 27 out of 100 (20–34 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Software can suggest a plan from the notes, but a licensed practitioner must decide what treatment a patient actually gets.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Inserting needles to provide acupuncture treatment
This work happens in the physical world: needles, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Insert needles to provide acupuncture treatment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Putting needles into someone's skin is done by hand on a real body, so software cannot take it over.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Evaluating treatment outcomes and recommending new or altered treatments as necessary to further promote
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for treatment outcomes, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Evaluate treatment outcomes and recommend new or altered treatments as necessary to further promote, restore, or maintain health.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 20 out of 100 (13–27 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Software can spot patterns in progress notes, but changing someone's treatment is a licensed clinical decision.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

Show the other 8 tasks

Educating patients on topics, such as meditation, ergonomics, stretching, exercise, nutrition
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles patients and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Educate patients on topics, such as meditation, ergonomics, stretching, exercise, nutrition, the healing process, breathing, or relaxation techniques.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 34 out of 100 (27–41 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Explaining stretching, breathing or nutrition draws on well-published material software writes well, though patients value hearing it in person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Analyzing physical findings and medical histories to make diagnoses according to Oriental medicine traditions
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for physical findings, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Analyze physical findings and medical histories to make diagnoses according to Oriental medicine traditions.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 20 out of 100 (13–27 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Software can reason over recorded findings, but traditional-medicine diagnosis is sparsely documented and remains a licensed judgment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Formulating herbal preparations to treat conditions considering herbal properties
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: herbal preparations, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Formulate herbal preparations to treat conditions considering herbal properties, such as taste, toxicity, effects of preparation, contraindications, and incompatibilities.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 16 out of 100 (9–23 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Choosing ingredients is a knowledge task software can support, but actually mixing the preparation needs hands and a licensed person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Dispensing herbal formulas and informing patients of dosages and frequencies
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: herbal formulas, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Dispense herbal formulas and inform patients of dosages and frequencies, treatment duration, possible side effects, and drug interactions.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 15 out of 100 (8–22 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Interactions and dosages are documented, but handing over herbs and confirming them is licensed, in-person work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Assessing patients' general physical appearance to make diagnoses
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: patients' general physical appearance, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Assess patients' general physical appearance to make diagnoses.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 3 out of 100 (0–10 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Judging how a patient looks in the room, including complexion and tongue, needs the person physically in front of you.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Applying moxibustion directly or indirectly to patients
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: moxibustion, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Apply moxibustion directly or indirectly to patients using Chinese, non-scarring, stick, or pole moxa.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Burning moxa near or on a patient's skin is entirely hands-on treatment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Applying heat or cold therapy to patients
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: heat, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Apply heat or cold therapy to patients using materials, such as heat pads, hydrocollator packs, warm compresses, cold compresses, heat lamps, or vapor coolants.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Putting hot packs or cold compresses on a patient's body is entirely physical.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Treating medical conditions, using techniques, acupressure, shiatsu or tuina
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: medical conditions, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Treat medical conditions, using techniques such as acupressure, shiatsu, or tuina.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Acupressure, shiatsu and tuina are done with the hands on a patient's body.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay: $76,040a year, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.bls-oews, 2025 · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
How we know this
Source: bls-oews
Reference period: May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
Rounding: Shown as published.
People doing this job: 7,830in the US, 2025.bls-oews · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)

What is deliberately not here: a forecast of how many of these jobs exist in ten years. Where an official projection exists for a market we publish it with its vintage; where it does not, we leave the space empty rather than borrow the other country’s number.

Why this is shifting

The reason is boringly specific. Most of what is shifting here is reading one thing and writing another: medical histories in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: maintaining detailed and completing records of health care plans and prognoses and collecting medical histories and general health and lifestyle information from patients. What it cannot do is be answerable: patients need a named person the rules will accept, and software cannot be that person. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.

Your move

Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend

Start with what does not change: treating patients using tools, such as needles, cups, ear balls, seeds, pellets or nutritional supplements is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.

So, given all that: 6% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 12% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 82% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 18 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.

So the thing worth your attention is not the job going away. It is the layer around it. Maintaining detailed and completing records of health care plans and prognoses is the part turning into software, and being the person who understands that layer is worth money.

This week: one thing

Ask the one question. Find whoever is bringing new software into your workplace (the manager, the office, whoever runs the system) and ask them what it is meant to do to medical histories, and what it is not meant to touch. Ten minutes, this week, before anyone decides it for you.

What you end up holding: a straight answer about what is actually being rolled out, and when
How long it takes: ten minutes

If there’s nobody obvious to ask, or you’d rather not ask your manager: Put the same question to your union rep, your shift lead or the person who has been there longest, in person, over a break. Same ten minutes, same answer, and you will usually get a straighter one. Write down what they say. The note is the artifact, and it tells you whether standard quality is in scope or not. Nothing to log into, no license needed.

Over the next 90 days

Get inside the tool rollout rather than waiting for it. Over the next ninety days, ask to be in the group that tests, checks or signs off whatever new system arrives near collecting medical histories and general health and lifestyle information from patients. It is usually an unglamorous seat that nobody fights for, and it is the one that decides how the software is used on your job rather than to it.

Over the next 12 months

On this evidence I would not retrain out of this job, and I will say that plainly rather than hedge it. The task list here is dominated by work that stays with a person. What I would do with a year is get formally recognised for the layer around it (the systems, the compliance, the planning), so you are the one who understands the software instead of the one it is done to. Before you pay for anything, use CareerOneStop - Find local training. It is free, it is the Labor Department's own service, and it is listed below with the rest of the free routes.

The roads out of here, and why I am not sending you down them

I looked at the obvious moves out of this job, and here is what I found.

I checked the 12 nearest US occupations to acupuncturists (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was nurse practitioners: only about 7% of its durable work is work you already do. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 20/100 here, with only 6% of the task list in the top band, and “maintain and follow standard quality, safety, environmental, and infection control policies and…” is not work that hands over cleanly. None of them beats deepening what you already have.

How that was checked: this job was compared against all 830 US occupations in this release on their official task statements, and the 12 nearest were examined one by one. A move that turns on an industry, an employer or a qualification rather than on the work itself will not show up in a check like that. And this release carries no licence register, so anything you are weighing needs that looked up separately.

3 moves I checked and rejected

These are the obvious-looking jumps. They are here with their reasons rather than quietly dropped, because the ones that fail are worth knowing about. It is one less thing to turn over at night.

Nurse Practitioners
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already maintain detailed and complete records of health care plans and prognoses, and their equivalent is to maintain complete and detailed records of patients' health care plans and prognoses. Across both published task lists that is about 7% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 7% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Neurologists
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already collect medical histories and general health and lifestyle information from patients, and their equivalent is to interview patients to obtain information. Across both published task lists that is about 3% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 3% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. The pay gap is the market pricing a barrier: $248,560 against your $76,040 is 3.27× (OEWS May 2025 (both)), and you would be crossing it holding about 3% of their durable work. A gap that size with an overlap that small is a wish, not a route.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Obstetricians and Gynecologists
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already collect medical histories and general health and lifestyle information from patients, and their equivalent is to collect, record, and maintain patient information. Across both published task lists that is about 2% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 2% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. The pay gap is the market pricing a barrier: $292,910 against your $76,040 is 3.85× (OEWS May 2025 (both)), and you would be crossing it holding about 2% of their durable work. A gap that size with an overlap that small is a wish, not a route.
Look at that job’s page anyway →

What I’d stop worrying about

A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.

The headline number you read somewhere
The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 6% of its task weight, across 18 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The headlines about your trade disappearing
They are usually about the technology, not the timetable. Changes to work like treating patients using tools, such as needles, cups, ear balls, seeds, pellets or nutritional supplements arrive through rules, insurance and money, slowly and visibly. This page tracks the task evidence and will move when it moves.
Retraining out of a job that is holding up
On this evidence I would not spend money leaving. Spend it on the layer around the job instead: the tools, the paperwork, the planning. That is where the change actually is.
The “obvious” next job everyone suggests
I checked the obvious moves and most of them did not survive. The reasons are printed with the routes above, including the pay and the gate. A move that fails on the numbers is worth knowing about so you can stop turning it over at night.

You are reading the United States figures

The United Kingdom splits this work across more than one official group, of which Occupational therapists is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.

Switch to the United Kingdom page →partial match

The other groups this work is counted across:

In UK official statistics this job is counted as Occupational therapists, Podiatrists and Therapy professionals n.e.c.. Pay is shown separately for each of those groups (medians cannot be averaged together), while the task list and the scores on this page are for this group only.

Your route through this

Where to go next, and what it costs

Free, and complete

The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.

Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Find local training
Search what's running near you, from the Labor Department's own database, before anyone sells you a course.
Free to search; individual programs vary, and some are funded
Anywhere in the US:
American Job Center locator
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
- CareerOneStop local help hub
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop
Free

No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it

Nothing Collab365 runs is built for acupuncturists, and we are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.

There is one that is not about a job title at all. The AI Authority is about being the person who directs these tools at work rather than the person they get compared to. That is worth saying here, because 6% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.

Try The AI Authority free →

7 days free, no card needed. Explore up to 2 Spaces before you choose a plan: you pick a plan later, not now.

The AI Authority is a general community about working with AI, not a course for acupuncturists. You do not need it to act on anything here: the moves above cost nothing and stand on their own. The data on this page is the same either way.

Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for acupuncturists launches. Nothing else.

That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.

We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.

No Space for acupuncturists yet. Should there be one?

Collab365 Spaces is built by the same people as this site. We find the problems that AI and automation are creating inside one kind of work, then solve them as short courses, briefings and Blueprints. Each Space is the community too, so the research and the people doing your job are in the same place.

What a Space actually is, in full

Collab365 launches new communities where the need is real. If one for acupuncturists existed, with researched problems, courses and people in the same boat, would you want in?

Your email

We use your email address for one thing: to tell you if a Space for acupuncturists launches. We never sell it, never use it for unrelated marketing, and every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Our privacy policy has the full version.

This unlocks nothing. Every figure, every row and every step on this page is already yours, whether you fill this in or not.

No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.

Questions people ask about this job

Will AI replace Acupuncturists?: Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 18 official task statements scored for Acupuncturists (United States, SOC 29-1291), 6% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 20 out of 100 (range 16–26, band: low). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.
Which tasks in “Acupuncturists” can AI already do?: The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Maintain detailed and complete records of health care plans and prognoses” (66/100, high); “Consider Western medical procedures in health assessment, health care team communication, and care referrals” (48/100, partial); “Collect medical histories and general health and lifestyle information from patients” (42/100, partial). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
Which tasks in “Acupuncturists” stay human?: About 82% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Insert needles to provide acupuncture treatment” (0/100, minimal); “Treat medical conditions, using techniques such as acupressure, shiatsu, or tuina” (0/100, minimal); “Apply heat or cold therapy to patients using materials, such as heat pads, hydrocollator packs, warm compresses, cold compresses, heat lamps, or vapor coolants” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
What should someone working in “Acupuncturists” do about AI?: Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 6% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 82% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.
How is the AI exposure score for Acupuncturists calculated?: Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 18 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

Where these numbers come from

Worth knowing about these figures

The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
2 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Task statements: onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
Task weights: onet-db (im-rt)
Scores: Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
Pay and employment: bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))

Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.

The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.

The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.

How we score a job Download this release Look up another job

Using these figures?

Cite this

Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.

Plain text

Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).

BibTeX

@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
  title        = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
  author       = {{Collab365}},
  year         = {2026},
  url          = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
  note         = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}

Permalink

https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1

Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.