Futureproof
Menu

US dataswitch to UK

Health Technologists and Technicians, All Other

indicating artifacts or interferences derived from sources outside of the brain, calibrating, troubleshooting and adjusting equipment to optimize viewing of the nervous system. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: conducting tonometry or tonography tests to measure intraocular pressure is work software can't reach.

Your move: what you can actually do about this ↓

What shifts is maintaining knowledge of community services and resources available to patients: the overhead at the edges, not the middle you trained for.

Your week, as this page understands it

All health technologists and technicians not listed separately. The job title says “health technologists”, “technicians” or “all other”: officially one job, several names. The real job is the part underneath: conducting tonometry or tonography tests to measure intraocular pressure. 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 health technologists and technicians, all other is not one task. It is 60 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is conducting tonometry or tonography tests to measure intraocular pressure, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI
7%
changing shape
18%
staying human
75%

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

Whole-job exposure score 21 out of 100 (17–26 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, across 60 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 health technologists and technicians, all other 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 2026-08-04. 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.

Shifting to AI

6 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.

  • Submitting reports to physicians summarizing test results

    This is reading one thing and writing another: reports in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Submit reports to physicians summarizing test results.” (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: Writing up test results for the physician is document work software 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.

  • Maintaining knowledge of community services and resources available to patients

    This is reading one thing and writing another: knowledge of community services in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Maintain knowledge of community services and resources available to patients.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 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 an up-to-date picture of what local services offer is exactly the sort of information gathering AI is good at.

    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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Developing and distributing newsletters, brochures or other printed materials to share information with patients or medical staff

    This is reading one thing and writing another: newsletters, brochures or other printed materials in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 3 · Core
    Source: “Develop and distribute newsletters, brochures, or other printed materials to share information with patients or medical staff.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 69 out of 100 (62–76 allowing for uncertainty): high 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: Producing newsletters and patient leaflets is writing and design software does well, though distribution is physical.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Collecting and reporting data on topics

    This is reading one thing and writing another: data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 3 · Supplemental
    Source: “Collect and report data on topics, such as patient encounters or inter-institutional problems, making recommendations for change when appropriate.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 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: Collecting data on patient encounters and recommending changes is standard analysis and reporting.

    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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Changing shape

10 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.

  • Indicating artifacts or interferences derived from sources outside of the brain

    The software now makes the first pass at artifacts, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Indicate artifacts or interferences derived from sources outside of the brain, such as poor electrode contact or patient movement, on electroneurodiagnostic recordings.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (42–56 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: Spotting recording artifacts is pattern-matching software does reliably, though the trace comes from a patient wired up in the room.

    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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Taking and documenting patients' medical histories

    The software now makes the first pass at patients' medical histories, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Take and document patients' medical histories.” (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: Taking and recording a medical history is structured question-and-record work software handles well.

    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.

  • Collecting patients' medical information needed to customize tests

    The software now makes the first pass at patients' medical information, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Collect patients' medical information needed to customize tests.” (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: Gathering the medical details needed to set up a test is records and interview work software supports well.

    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.

Staying human

44 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 tonometry or tonography tests to measure intraocular pressure

    This work happens in the physical world: tonometry, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Conduct tonometry or tonography tests to measure intraocular pressure.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–7 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence, and it moved between repeat runs, so the range is widened.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.

    The rating behind it: Measuring eye pressure involves an instrument touching or aimed directly at the patient's eye.

    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.

  • Monitoring patients during tests or surgeries

    This work happens in the physical world: patients during tests, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Monitor patients during tests or surgeries, using electroencephalographs (EEG), evoked potential (EP) instruments, or video recording equipment.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (5–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high 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: Watching a patient during a test or surgery means being present at the bedside.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Conducting tests or studies, electroencephalography, EEG), polysomnography, PSG), nerve conduction studies, NCS), electromyography, EMG) and intraoperative monitoring, IOM)

    This work happens in the physical world: tests, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Conduct tests or studies such as electroencephalography (EEG), polysomnography (PSG), nerve conduction studies (NCS), electromyography (EMG), and intraoperative monitoring (IOM).” (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: 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: Running these nerve and brain studies means attaching equipment to a patient.

    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 3/4.

Show the other 50 tasks

  • Analyzing patients' abilities to pay to determine charges on a sliding scale

    shifting to AI

    This is reading one thing and writing another: patients' abilities in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source: “Analyze patients' abilities to pay to determine charges on a sliding scale.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 69 out of 100 (62–76 allowing for uncertainty): high 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: Working out a sliding-scale charge from someone finances follows fixed rules software applies accurately.

    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.

  • Identifying and sharing research, recommendations or other information regarding legal liabilities, risk management or quality of care

    shifting to AI

    This is reading one thing and writing another: research, recommendations or other information regarding legal liabilities in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 3 · Supplemental
    Source: “Identify and share research, recommendations, or other information regarding legal liabilities, risk management, or quality of care.” (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: Researching and sharing risk and quality-of-care information is desk research and writing.

    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.

  • Summarizing technical data to assist physicians to diagnose brain

    changing shape

    The software now makes the first pass at technical data, 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 5 · Core
    Source: “Summarize technical data to assist physicians to diagnose brain, sleep, or nervous system disorders.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 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: Summarizing recording data for a physician is analysis and writing software does well, with the doctor diagnosing.

    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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Referring patients to appropriate health care services or resources

    changing shape

    The software now makes the first pass at patients, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Refer patients to appropriate health care services or resources.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 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: Matching a patient to the right service is documented search-and-refer work software does 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 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Calculating corrections for refractive errors

    changing shape

    The software now makes the first pass at corrections, 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 5 · Core
    Source: “Calculate corrections for refractive errors.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 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: Working out the correction from measurements is calculation, though the prescription itself is an optometrist call.

    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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Explaining policies, procedures or services to patients using medical or administrative knowledge

    changing shape

    The software now makes the first pass at policies, procedures or services, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Explain policies, procedures, or services to patients using medical or administrative knowledge.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 53 out of 100 (46–60 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; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Explaining policies and services draws on documented material, though patients often want a person to ask.

    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 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Investigating and directing patient inquiries or complaints to appropriate medical staff members and following up to ensure satisfactory resolution

    changing shape

    The software now makes the first pass at patient inquiries, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Investigate and direct patient inquiries or complaints to appropriate medical staff members and follow up to ensure satisfactory resolution.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 53 out of 100 (46–60 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; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Handling a complaint means routing it and chasing people until the patient is satisfied.

    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 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Reading current literature, talk with colleagues, continue education or participating in professional organizations or conferences to keep abreast of developments in the field

    changing shape

    The software now makes the first pass at current literature, talk, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Read current literature, talk with colleagues, continue education, or participate in professional organizations or conferences to keep abreast of developments in the field.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 53 out of 100 (46–60 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: Keeping up with the field is mostly reading, with some events attended in person.

    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 4/4.

  • Calling patients to inquire about their post-operative status or recovery

    changing shape

    The software now makes the first pass at patients, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Call patients to inquire about their post-operative status or recovery.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 46 out of 100 (39–53 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; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Following up after surgery by phone is largely scripted contact, though clinical judgment shapes the replies.

    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 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Providing consultation or training to volunteers or staff on topics

    staying human

    The value here is that a specific person handles consultation and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source: “Provide consultation or training to volunteers or staff on topics, such as guest relations, patients' rights, or medical issues.” (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: Training volunteers and staff on patient relations works through being with them.

    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.

  • Educating patients on ophthalmic medical procedures

    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 ophthalmic medical procedures, conditions of the eye, and appropriate use of medications.” (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 eye conditions and medication uses documented material, though patients take it in from a 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.

  • Coordinating communication between patients, family members, medical staff, administrative staff or regulatory agencies

    staying human

    The value here is that a specific person handles communication and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Coordinate communication between patients, family members, medical staff, administrative staff, or regulatory agencies.” (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: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Keeping patients, families and staff in the loop is coordination that runs on live contact.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · 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.

  • Interviewing patients or their representatives to identify problems relating to care

    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: “Interview patients or their representatives to identify problems relating to care.” (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: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Finding out what went wrong for a patient comes from talking with them.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · 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.

  • Participating in research projects, conferences or technical meetings

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: research projects, conferences or technical meetings, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Participate in research projects, conferences, or technical meetings.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 24 out of 100 (17–31 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: Research and technical meetings mix desk work with attending in person.

    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 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Performing ophthalmic triage, in the office or by phone, to assess severity of patients' conditions

    staying human

    The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for ophthalmic triage, and that person cannot be a piece of software.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Perform ophthalmic triage, in the office or by phone, to assess severity of patients' conditions.” (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; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Judging how urgent an eye problem is draws on documented guidance but carries clinical responsibility.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · 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.

  • Assisting in training technicians, medical students, residents or other staff members

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: training technicians, medical students, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Assist in training technicians, medical students, residents, or other staff members.” (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: 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: Training other technicians happens alongside them at the equipment.

    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 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Explaining testing procedures

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: procedures, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Explain testing procedures to patients, answering questions or reassuring patients, as needed.” (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: 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: Reassuring a nervous patient before a test works because a person is there doing it.

    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 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Creating three-dimensional images of the eye

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: three-dimensional images of the eye, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source: “Create three-dimensional images of the eye, using computed tomography (CT).” (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: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Producing three-dimensional eye images is largely computed, but the scan itself is taken on the patient.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Calibrating, troubleshooting or repairing equipment and correct malfunctions

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Calibrate, troubleshoot, or repair equipment and correct malfunctions, as needed.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 14 out of 100 (10–18 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high 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: Calibrating and repairing equipment means hands on the machine.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Assessing abnormalities of color vision

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: abnormalities of color vision, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Assess abnormalities of color vision, such as amblyopia.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 14 out of 100 (7–21 allowing for uncertainty): minimal 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: Color vision testing uses standard plates worked through with the patient.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Measuring visual, auditory or somatosensory evoked potentials, EPs) to determine responses to stimuli

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: visual, auditory or somatosensory evoked potentials, eps), in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Measure visual, auditory, or somatosensory evoked potentials (EPs) to determine responses to stimuli.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (6–20 allowing for uncertainty): minimal 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: Evoked potential readings are taken from a patient wired to the equipment.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Setting up, program or recording montages or electrical combinations when testing peripheral nerve, spinal cord, subcortical or cortical responses

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: up, program or recording montages or electrical combinations, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Set up, program, or record montages or electrical combinations when testing peripheral nerve, spinal cord, subcortical, or cortical responses.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (9–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high 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: Setting up recording montages is hands-on work at the equipment and the patient.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Adjusting equipment to optimize viewing of the nervous system

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Adjust equipment to optimize viewing of the nervous system.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (9–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Adjusting the equipment during a study is done at the machine.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Supervising or instructing ophthalmic staff

    staying human

    The value here is that a specific person handles ophthalmic staff and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Supervise or instruct ophthalmic staff.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (9–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Supervising ophthalmic staff depends on working relationships inside the clinic.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Conducting tests, such as the Amsler Grid test

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: tests, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Conduct tests, such as the Amsler Grid test, to measure central visual field used in the early diagnosis of macular degeneration, glaucoma, or diseases of the eye.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 11 out of 100 (4–18 allowing for uncertainty): minimal 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: Grid and central field tests are worked through with the patient in the clinic.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Conducting visual field tests to measure field of vision

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: visual field tests, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Conduct visual field tests to measure field of vision.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 11 out of 100 (4–18 allowing for uncertainty): minimal 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: Visual field testing runs on a machine, but the patient has to be positioned and watched.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Teaching patients to use home health care equipment

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: patients, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 3 · Supplemental
    Source: “Teach patients to use home health care equipment.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (5–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high 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: Teaching a patient to use home care equipment is shown hands-on.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Measuring and recording lens power

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: lens power, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Measure and record lens power, using lensometers.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (2–16 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence, and it moved between repeat runs, so the range is widened.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: The lensometer reads the power, but someone has to place and hold the lens in it.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Instructing patients in the care and use of contact lenses

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: patients, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Instruct patients in the care and use of contact lenses.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (5–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high 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: Showing someone how to handle and care for contact lenses is taught hands-on.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Conducting low vision blindness tests

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: low vision blindness tests, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Conduct low vision blindness tests.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 8 out of 100 (1–15 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: Low vision testing is carried out in the clinic with the patient and specialist equipment.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Measuring visual acuity, including near, distance, pinhole or dynamic visual acuity, using appropriate tests

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: visual acuity, including near, distance, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Measure visual acuity, including near, distance, pinhole, or dynamic visual acuity, using appropriate tests.” (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: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Reading an acuity chart requires the patient present and responding to the tester.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Conducting binocular disparity tests to assess depth perception

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: binocular disparity tests, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Conduct binocular disparity tests to assess depth perception.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (2–10 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Depth perception testing needs the patient present and responding to what they see.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Attaching electrodes to patients, using adhesives

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: electrodes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Attach electrodes to patients, using adhesives.” (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: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Attaching electrodes to a patient is physical work by definition.

    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 3/4.

  • Conducting tests to determine cerebral death

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: tests, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Conduct tests to determine cerebral death, the absence of brain activity, or the probability of recovery from a coma.” (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: 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: Brain-death and coma testing is performed on the patient with equipment attached.

    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 3/4.

  • Measuring patients' body parts and marking locations where electrodes

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: patients' body parts, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Measure patients' body parts and mark locations where electrodes are to be placed.” (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: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Measuring a patient head and marking electrode sites has to be done on the person.

    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 3/4.

  • Administering topical ophthalmic or oral medications

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: topical ophthalmic, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Administer topical ophthalmic or oral medications.” (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 drops in someone's eye or handing over medication is physical care given in person under a doctor's authority.

    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.

  • Assessing refractive condition of eyes

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: refractive condition of eyes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Assess refractive condition of eyes, using retinoscope.” (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: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Retinoscopy is performed with an instrument at the patient eye.

    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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Assisting physicians in performing ophthalmic procedures

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: physicians, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Assist physicians in performing ophthalmic procedures, including surgery.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–7 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence, and it moved between repeat runs, so the range is widened.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.

    The rating behind it: Assisting during eye surgery is hands-on work in the operating room.

    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 1/4.

  • Collecting ophthalmic measurements or other diagnostic information

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: ophthalmic measurements, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Collect ophthalmic measurements or other diagnostic information, using ultrasound equipment, such as A-scan ultrasound biometry or B-scan ultrasonography equipment.” (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: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Ultrasound eye measurement is taken with the probe on the patient.

    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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Conducting ocular motility tests to measure function of eye muscles

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: ocular motility tests, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Conduct ocular motility tests to measure function of eye muscles.” (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: Eye muscle testing is carried out with the patient in front of you.

    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.

  • Measuring corneal curvature with keratometers or ophthalmometers to aid in the diagnosis of conditions

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: corneal curvature, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Measure corneal curvature with keratometers or ophthalmometers to aid in the diagnosis of conditions, such as astigmatism.” (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: Corneal curvature is measured with the instrument at the patient eye.

    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.

  • Measuring corneal thickness, using pachymeter or contacting ultrasound methods

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: corneal thickness, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Measure corneal thickness, using pachymeter or contact ultrasound methods.” (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: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Corneal thickness measurement needs the instrument on the eye.

    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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Measuring the thickness of the retinal nerve

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: the thickness of the retinal nerve, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Measure the thickness of the retinal nerve, using scanning laser polarimetry techniques to aid in diagnosis of glaucoma.” (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: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Retinal nerve scanning is performed on the patient at the machine.

    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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Performing advanced ophthalmic procedures, including electrophysiological, electrophysical or microbial procedures

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: advanced ophthalmic procedures, including electrophysiological, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 3 · Core
    Source: “Perform advanced ophthalmic procedures, including electrophysiological, electrophysical, or microbial procedures.” (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: 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: Advanced ophthalmic procedures are performed on the patient.

    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 3/4.

  • Performing fluorescein angiography of the eye

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: fluorescein angiography of the eye, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Perform fluorescein angiography of the eye.” (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: 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: Angiography involves injecting dye and imaging the patient.

    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 3/4.

  • Performing slit lamp biomicroscopy procedures to diagnose disorders of the eye

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: slit lamp biomicroscopy procedures, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Supplemental
    Source: “Perform slit lamp biomicroscopy procedures to diagnose disorders of the eye, such as retinitis, presbyopia, cataracts, or retinal detachment.” (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: 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: Slit lamp examination requires the patient at the instrument.

    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 3/4.

  • Photographing patients' eye areas, using clinical photography techniques, to document retinal or corneal defects

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: patients' eye areas, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Photograph patients' eye areas, using clinical photography techniques, to document retinal or corneal defects.” (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: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Clinical eye photography is done with the patient at the camera.

    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 3/4.

  • Taking anatomical or functional ocular measurements

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: anatomical, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Take anatomical or functional ocular measurements, such as axial length measurements, of the eye or surrounding tissue.” (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: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Measuring the eye requires instruments applied to the patient.

    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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Cleaning or sterilizing ophthalmic or surgical instruments

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: ophthalmic, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Clean or sterilize ophthalmic or surgical instruments.” (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 sterilizing instruments is physical work in the clinic.

    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 2/4.

  • Maintaining ophthalmic instruments or equipment

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: ophthalmic instruments, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Maintain ophthalmic instruments or equipment.” (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: Keeping clinic instruments working means hands on the equipment.

    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 2/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay
$50,290a 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
182,610in 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: knowledge of community services in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: maintaining knowledge of community services and resources available to patients and submitting reports to physicians summarizing test results. What it cannot do is be answerable: tonometry needs 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: conducting tonometry or tonography tests to measure intraocular pressure is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.

So, given all that: 7% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 18% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 75% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 60 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 knowledge of community services and resources available to patients 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 knowledge of community services, 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 patients during tests 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 indicating artifacts or interferences derived from sources outside of the brain. 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 health technologists and technicians, all other (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was ophthalmic medical technicians: only about 29% of its durable work is work you already do. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 21/100 here, with only 7% of the task list in the top band, and “indicate artifacts or interferences derived from sources outside of the brain” 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.

  • Ophthalmic Medical Technicians

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “conduct tonometry or tonography tests to measure intraocular pressure”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 29% of the work in that job the software is not taking.

    Why I am not recommending it: It is closer than most, and still not close enough: about 29% of that job's durable work is already yours, against the 35% I want to see before I will call something a route.

    Look at that job’s page anyway →

  • Healthcare Diagnosing or Treating Practitioners, All Other

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already take and document patients' medical histories, and their equivalent is to interview patients to document symptoms and health histories. 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: $115,210 against your $50,290 is 2.29× (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. And it is a narrow door: about 28,630 of those jobs against 182,610 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 16% as many seats.

    Look at that job’s page anyway →

  • Ophthalmologists, Except Pediatric

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already administer topical ophthalmic or oral medications, and their equivalent is to prescribe or administer topical or systemic medications to treat ophthalmic conditions and 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: $300,080 against your $50,290 is 5.97× (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. And it is a narrow door: about 8,950 of those jobs against 182,610 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 5% as many seats.

    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: 7% of its task weight, across 60 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 conducting tonometry or tonography tests to measure intraocular pressure 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 Health associate professionals n.e.c. 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

In UK official statistics this job is counted as Health associate professionals n.e.c.. Pay and employment stay on this page’s own group; the task list and the scores do not cross over.

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.

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

Nothing Collab365 runs is built for health technologists / technicians / all other, 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 7% 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 health technologists / technicians / all other. 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 health technologists / technicians / all other 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 health technologists / technicians / all other 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 health technologists / technicians / all other existed, with researched problems, courses and people in the same boat, would you want in?

We use your email address for one thing: to tell you if a Space for health technologists / technicians / all other 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 Health Technologists and Technicians, All Other?
Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 60 official task statements scored for Health Technologists and Technicians, All Other (United States, SOC 29-2099), 7% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 21 out of 100 (range 17–26, 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 “Health Technologists and Technicians, All Other” can AI already do?
The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Collect and report data on topics, such as patient encounters or inter-institutional problems, making recommendations for change when appropriate” (75/100, high); “Maintain knowledge of community services and resources available to patients” (75/100, high); “Analyze patients' abilities to pay to determine charges on a sliding scale” (69/100, 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 “Health Technologists and Technicians, All Other” stay human?
About 75% 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: “Maintain ophthalmic instruments or equipment” (0/100, minimal); “Clean or sterilize ophthalmic or surgical instruments” (0/100, minimal); “Take anatomical or functional ocular measurements, such as axial length measurements, of the eye or surrounding tissue” (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 “Health Technologists and Technicians, All Other” do about AI?
Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 7% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 75% 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 Health Technologists and Technicians, All Other 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 60 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

About the data on this page

  • 3 tasks scored differently between repeat runs, so their range on this page is wider. We would rather show the wobble than hide it.
  • The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
  • 18 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 jobDownload this releaseLook 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 . 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.