Will AI replace Athletic Trainers?

Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 23 official task statements scored for Athletic Trainers (United States, SOC 29-9091), 12% 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 17–25, 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 “Athletic Trainers” can AI already do?

The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Perform general administrative tasks, such as keeping records or writing reports” (81/100, very high); “File athlete insurance claims and communicate with insurance providers” (69/100, high); “Develop training programs or routines designed to improve athletic performance” (64/100, high). 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 “Athletic Trainers” stay human?

About 80% 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: “Clean and sanitize athletic training rooms” (0/100, minimal); “Lead stretching exercises for team members prior to games or practices” (0/100, minimal); “Perform team support duties, such as running errands, maintaining equipment, or stocking supplies” (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 “Athletic Trainers” do about AI?

Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 12% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 80% 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 Athletic Trainers 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 23 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

Athletic Trainers

conducting an initial assessment of an athlete's injury or illness to provide emergency or continued care and to determine whether they should be referred to physicians for definitive diagnosis and treatment, collaborating with physicians to develop and implement comprehensive rehabilitation programs for athletic injuries and applying protective or injury preventive devices. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: caring for athletic injuries, using physical therapy equipment, techniques or medication 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: 12%
changing shape: 8%
staying human: 80%

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

Whole-job exposure score 20 out of 100 (17–25 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, across 23 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 athletic trainers 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 performing general administrative tasks, such as keeping records or writing reports: the paper around the work, not the work.

Your week, as this page understands it

Evaluate and treat musculoskeletal injuries or illnesses. Provide preventive, therapeutic, emergency, and rehabilitative care. The job title says “athletic trainers”. The real job is the part underneath: caring for athletic injuries, using physical therapy equipment, techniques or medication. 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 athletic trainers is not one task. It is 23 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is caring for athletic injuries, using physical therapy equipment, techniques or medication, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 12%
changing shape: 8%
staying human: 80%

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.

4 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

3 tasks

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.

Performing general administrative tasks, such as keeping records or writing reports
This is reading one thing and writing another: general administrative tasks in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Perform general administrative tasks, such as keeping records or writing reports.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 81 out of 100 (77–85 allowing for uncertainty): very 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 records and writing routine reports is structured paperwork that software drafts and organizes well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · 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.
Developing training programs or routines designed to improve athletic performance
This is reading one thing and writing another: programs in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Develop training programs or routines designed to improve athletic performance.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (60–68 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: Training programs follow well-published principles, so software can build a solid draft the trainer then tailors.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Filing athlete insurance claims and communicating with insurance providers
This is reading one thing and writing another: athlete insurance claims in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “File athlete insurance claims and communicate with insurance providers.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 69 out of 100 (65–73 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: Insurance claims are standard forms with standard codes, which software completes and tracks reliably.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · 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.

Planning or implementing comprehensive athletic injury or illness prevention programs
The software now makes the first pass at comprehensive athletic injury, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Plan or implement comprehensive athletic injury or illness prevention programs.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 42 out of 100 (35–49 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; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Prevention programs follow published guidance that software can assemble into a solid plan for the trainer to adapt.
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.
Conducting research or providing instruction on subject matter related to athletic training or sports medicine
The software now makes the first pass at research, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Conduct research or provide instruction on subject matter related to athletic training or sports medicine.” (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; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Preparing research or teaching material on sports medicine is writing work software supports strongly.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Staying human

18 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.

Conducting an initial assessment of an athlete's injury or illness to provide emergency or continued care and to determine whether they should be referred to physicians for definitive diagnosis and treatment
This work happens in the physical world: an initial assessment of an athlete's injury, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Conduct an initial assessment of an athlete's injury or illness to provide emergency or continued care and to determine whether they should be referred to physicians for definitive diagnosis and treatment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 4 out of 100 (0–8 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: Assessing an injury means physically examining the athlete, and state rules require a licensed trainer to do it.
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 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Caring for athletic injuries, using physical therapy equipment, techniques or medication
This work happens in the physical world: athletic injuries, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Care for athletic injuries, using physical therapy equipment, techniques, or medication.” (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: Treating an injury with therapy equipment, technique or medication is hands-on licensed care.
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.
Evaluating athletes' readiness to play and providing participation clearances
This work happens in the physical world: athletes' readiness, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Evaluate athletes' readiness to play and provide participation clearances when necessary and warranted.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (3–11 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: Clearing an athlete to play is a licensed decision made after physically checking how they move.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Assessing and reporting the progress of recovering athletes to coaches or physicians
This work happens in the physical world: the progress of recovering athletes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Assess and report the progress of recovering athletes to coaches or physicians.” (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: The progress report is easy to write up, but the judgment behind it comes from hands-on examination.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Cleaning and sanitizing athletic training rooms
This work happens in the physical world: athletic training rooms, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Clean and sanitize athletic training rooms.” (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.
The rating behind it: Cleaning and sanitizing a training room is hands-on work in the room.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

Show the other 13 tasks

Recommending special diets to improve athletes' health
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for special diets, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Recommend special diets to improve athletes' health, increase their stamina, or alter their weight.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 39 out of 100 (32–46 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; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Diet guidance is well documented, but nutrition advice is a regulated area normally referred to a dietitian.
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 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Conferring with coaches to select protective equipment
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles coaches and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Confer with coaches to select protective equipment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 39 out of 100 (32–46 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: Comparing protective equipment options is well-documented research, though the choice is settled in discussion with coaches.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Collaborating with physicians to develop and implement comprehensive rehabilitation programs for athletic injuries
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for physicians, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Collaborate with physicians to develop and implement comprehensive rehabilitation programs for athletic injuries.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 30 out of 100 (23–37 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; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Rehabilitation protocols are well published and easy to draft, but a physician and trainer must agree and own the plan.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Instructing coaches, athletes, parents, medical personnel or community members in the care and prevention of athletic injuries
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: coaches, athletes, parents, medical personnel or community members, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Instruct coaches, athletes, parents, medical personnel, or community members in the care and prevention of athletic injuries.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 23 out of 100 (16–30 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Injury prevention content is well documented and easy to produce, but teaching it lands better delivered in person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Advising athletes on the proper use of equipment
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: athletes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Advise athletes on the proper use of equipment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (11–25 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; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Equipment guidance is well documented, but athletes usually need it shown and adjusted in person.
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 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Teaching sports medicine courses to athletic training students
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: sports medicine courses, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Teach sports medicine courses to athletic training students.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (11–25 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; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Course material is easy to produce, but teaching students hands-on clinical skills happens in a room with them.
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 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Applying protective or injury preventive devices
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: protective, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Apply protective or injury preventive devices, such as tape, bandages, or braces, to body parts, such as ankles, fingers, or wrists.” (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.
The rating behind it: Taping ankles and fitting braces is skilled work done directly on the athlete body.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Travelling with athletic teams to be available at sporting events
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: athletic teams, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Travel with athletic teams to be available at sporting events.” (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; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Being available at a game means physically traveling with the team and being on the sideline.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Inspecting playing fields to locate any items that could injure players
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: fields, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Inspect playing fields to locate any items that could injure players.” (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.
The rating behind it: Walking a field to spot hazards requires eyes and feet on the ground.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Massaging body parts to relieve soreness
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: body parts, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Massage body parts to relieve soreness, strains, or bruises.” (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; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Massage is direct physical contact with the athlete.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Accompanying injured athletes to hospitals
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: injured athletes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Accompany injured athletes to hospitals.” (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; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Going to hospital with an injured athlete means physically being with them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Performing team support duties, such as running errands, maintaining equipment or stocking supplies
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: team support duties, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Perform team support duties, such as running errands, maintaining equipment, or stocking supplies.” (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.
The rating behind it: Running errands, maintaining kit and stocking supplies is practical physical work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Leading stretching exercises for team members prior to games or practices
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: exercises, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Lead stretching exercises for team members prior to games or practices.” (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; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Leading a stretching session means being in front of the team demonstrating and correcting.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay: $62,520a 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: 30,500in 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: general administrative tasks in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: performing general administrative tasks and developing training programs or routines designed to improve athletic performance. What it cannot do is be answerable: athletic injuries 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: caring for athletic injuries, using physical therapy equipment, techniques or medication is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.

So, given all that: 12% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 8% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 80% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 23 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. Performing general administrative tasks, such as keeping records or writing reports 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 general administrative tasks, 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 athletic injuries are 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 planning or implementing comprehensive athletic injury or illness prevention programs. 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 athletic trainers (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was coaches and scouts: only about 9% of its durable work is work you already do and it pays 24.3% less. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 20/100 here, with only 12% of the task list in the top band, and “conduct an initial assessment of an athlete's injury or illness to provide…” 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.

Coaches and Scouts
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already advise athletes on the proper use of equipment, and their equivalent is to monitor athletes' use of equipment to ensure safe and proper use. Across both published task lists that is about 9% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 9% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $47,320 against your $62,520, 24.3% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Family Medicine Physicians
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already care for athletic injuries, using physical therapy equipment, techniques, or medication, and their equivalent is to prescribe or administer treatment, therapy, medication, vaccination, and other specialized medical care to…. Across both published task lists that is about 5% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 5% 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: $244,180 against your $62,520 is 3.91× (OEWS May 2025 (both)), and you would be crossing it holding about 5% 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 care for athletic injuries, using physical therapy equipment, techniques, or medication, and their equivalent is to prescribe or administer therapy, medication, and other specialized medical care to treat or…. Across both published task lists that is about 5% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 5% 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 $62,520 is 4.68× (OEWS May 2025 (both)), and you would be crossing it holding about 5% 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: 12% of its task weight, across 23 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 caring for athletic injuries, using physical therapy equipment, techniques or medication 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 Fitness and wellbeing instructors 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:

Natural and social science professionals n.e.c.

In UK official statistics this job is counted as Fitness and wellbeing instructors and Natural and social science 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 athletic trainers, 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 12% 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 athletic trainers. 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 athletic trainers 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 athletic trainers 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 athletic trainers 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 athletic trainers 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 Athletic Trainers?: Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 23 official task statements scored for Athletic Trainers (United States, SOC 29-9091), 12% 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 17–25, 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 “Athletic Trainers” can AI already do?: The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Perform general administrative tasks, such as keeping records or writing reports” (81/100, very high); “File athlete insurance claims and communicate with insurance providers” (69/100, high); “Develop training programs or routines designed to improve athletic performance” (64/100, high). 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 “Athletic Trainers” stay human?: About 80% 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: “Clean and sanitize athletic training rooms” (0/100, minimal); “Lead stretching exercises for team members prior to games or practices” (0/100, minimal); “Perform team support duties, such as running errands, maintaining equipment, or stocking supplies” (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 “Athletic Trainers” do about AI?: Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 12% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 80% 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 Athletic Trainers 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 23 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.
4 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.