US dataswitch to UK
Pediatric Surgeons
preparing case histories, consulting with patient's other medical care specialists and informing parents and guardians of child's health problems and surgical procedures through various channels. If that's your week, this page is about your job.
The honest answer
AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: examining fetuses, infants, children and adolescents and diagnosing health issues to determine need for intervention, such as surgery is work software can't reach.
What shifts is preparing case histories. This page scores what today's tools actually do, not headlines.
Your week, as this page understands it
Diagnose and perform surgery to treat fetal abnormalities and birth defects, diseases, and injuries in fetuses, premature and newborn infants, children, and adolescents. Includes all pediatric surgical specialties and subspecialties. The job title says “pediatric surgeons”. The real job is the part underneath: examining fetuses, infants, children and adolescents and diagnosing health issues to determine need for intervention, such as surgery. 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 pediatric surgeons is not one task. It is 18 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is examining fetuses, infants, children and adolescents and diagnosing health issues to determine need for intervention, such as surgery, and the ledger below shows exactly why.
Where the work sits, by task weight
- shifting to AI
- 0%
- changing shape
- 22%
- staying human
- 78%
These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.
Whole-job exposure score 16 out of 100 (12–22 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, across 18 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.
How we know this
What is measured: Every published task statement for pediatric surgeons 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.
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.
- O*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
- 10 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
0 tasksTasks 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.
Nothing in this job’s scored task list landed in this group. That is the measurement, not an editorial choice, and it is worth knowing either way.
Changing shape
4 tasksTasks 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.
Preparing case histories
The software now makes the first pass at case histories, 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 not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Prepare case histories.” (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: Writing up a case history from the record is documentation AI drafts well for the doctor to check.
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 patient to medical specialist or other practitioners
The software now makes the first pass at patient, 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 not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Refer patient to medical specialist or other practitioners when necessary.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 48 out of 100 (41–55 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Referral criteria are well documented, so matching a patient to the right specialist is largely a decision support task.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Interpreting results of preoperative tests and physical examinations
The software now makes the first pass at results of preoperative tests, 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 not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Interpret results of preoperative tests and physical examinations.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 47 out of 100 (40–54 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: Pre-operative results interpret against published criteria, but the fitness decision carries the doctor's responsibility.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Managing surgery services, including planning, scheduling and coordination, determination of procedures or procurement of supplies and equipment
The software now makes the first pass at surgery services, including planning, scheduling and coordination, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Manage surgery services, including planning, scheduling and coordination, determination of procedures, or procurement of supplies and equipment.” (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: Scheduling, coordinating and ordering supplies is administrative work that 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.
Staying human
14 tasksTasks 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.
Analyzing patient's medical history, medication allergies, physical condition and examination results to verify operation's necessity and to determine best procedure
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for patient's medical history, medication allergies, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Analyze patient's medical history, medication allergies, physical condition, and examination results to verify operation's necessity and to determine best procedure.” (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 rating behind it: Records and scans can be summarized quickly, but deciding an operation is needed is a licensed surgeon’s judgment and responsibility.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Describing preoperative and postoperative treatments and procedures
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for preoperative, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Describe preoperative and postoperative treatments and procedures, such as sedatives, diets, antibiotics, or preparation and treatment of the patient's operative area, to parents or guardians of the patient.” (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: 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: The explanations are standard and easy to draft, but anxious parents need a doctor who answers them.
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 3/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Consulting with patient's other medical care specialists
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for patient's other medical care specialists, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Consult with patient's other medical care specialists, such as cardiologist and endocrinologist, to determine if surgery is necessary.” (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: someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Decisions about a specific child rest on named doctors weighing the case together.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Informing parents and guardians of child's health problems and surgical procedures through various channels
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for parents, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Inform parents and guardians of child's health problems and surgical procedures through various channels, such as in-person and telecommunication systems.” (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; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Telling parents about their child's condition is a conversation that depends on a trusted doctor.
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 4/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Conducting research to develop and test surgical techniques that can improve operating procedures and outcomes
This work happens in the physical world: research, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Conduct research to develop and test surgical techniques that can improve operating procedures and outcomes.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 12 out of 100 (5–19 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: Developing and testing new surgical techniques happens in laboratories and operating rooms.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Monitoring patient's recovery, making follow-up visits and using postoperative assessment techniques, such as blood and imaging tests
This work happens in the physical world: patient's recovery, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Monitor patient's recovery, making follow-up visits and using postoperative assessment techniques, such as blood and imaging tests.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (0–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Follow-up depends on seeing and examining the child as they recover.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · 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 3/4.
Show the other 8 tasks
Providing consultation and surgical assistance to other physicians and surgeons
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: consultation, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Provide consultation and surgical assistance to other physicians and surgeons.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 4 out of 100 (0–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Assisting another surgeon's operation means scrubbing in alongside them.
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.
Directing and coordinating activities of nurses
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: activities of nurses, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Direct and coordinate activities of nurses, assistants, specialists, residents, and other medical staff.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 3 out of 100 (0–7 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: Running a surgical team happens in the room, in real time, with people who know each other.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Examining fetuses, infants, children and adolescents and diagnosing health issues to determine need for intervention, such as surgery
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: fetuses, infants, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Examine fetuses, infants, children, and adolescents, and diagnose health issues to determine need for intervention, such as surgery.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Examining a child is hands-on and eyes-on, with the child present.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Examining instruments, equipment and operating room to ensure sterility
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: instruments, equipment and operating room, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Examine instruments, equipment, and operating room to ensure sterility.” (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: Checking instruments and the operating room for sterility is done by hand and eye 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 2/4.
Examining patient to obtain information on medical condition and surgical risk
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: patient, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Examine patient to obtain information on medical condition and surgical risk.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: A physical examination requires 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 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Following established surgical techniques during the operation
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: established surgical techniques during the operation, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Follow established surgical techniques during the operation.” (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: Operating is manual work carried out on a 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 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Operating on fetuses, infants, children and adolescents to correct deformities, repair injuries
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: fetuses, infants, children and adolescents, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Operate on fetuses, infants, children, and adolescents to correct deformities, repair injuries, prevent and treat diseases, or improve or restore patients' functions.” (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: Surgery on a child is physical work performed by a licensed surgeon.
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 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Performing transplantation operations, such as organ transplants, on fetuses, infants, children and adolescents
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: transplantation operations, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Perform transplantation operations, such as organ transplants, on fetuses, infants, children, and adolescents.” (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: Transplant surgery is hands-on operating.
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 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
What this job pays, and how many people do it
- Median pay
- $559,030a 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
- 1,190in 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: case histories in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: preparing case histories. What it cannot do is be answerable: fetuses, infants 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: examining fetuses, infants, children and adolescents and diagnosing health issues to determine need for intervention, such as surgery is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.
So, given all that: 0% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 22% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 78% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 18 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.
So the thing worth your attention is not the job going away. It is the layer around it. Preparing case histories 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 case histories, and what it is not meant to touch. Ten minutes, this week, before anyone decides it for you.
- What you end up holding
- a straight answer about what is actually being rolled out, and when
- How long it takes
- ten minutes
If there’s nobody obvious to ask, or you’d rather not ask your manager: Put the same question to your union rep, your shift lead or the person who has been there longest, in person, over a break. Same ten minutes, same answer, and you will usually get a straighter one. Write down what they say. The note is the artifact, and it tells you whether fetuses, infants 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 preparing case histories. 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 pediatric surgeons (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was orthopedic surgeons, except pediatric: it pays 35.9% less. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 16/100 here, with only 0% of the task list in the top band, and “analyze patient's medical history, medication allergies, physical condition, and examination results to…” 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.
Orthopedic Surgeons, Except Pediatric
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “examine instruments, equipment, and operating room to ensure sterility”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 62% of the work in that job the software is not taking.
Why I am not recommending it: It is a pay cut, in those words: $358,550 against your $559,030, 35.9% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Pediatricians, General
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already direct and coordinate activities of nurses, assistants, specialists, residents, and other medical staff, and their equivalent is to direct and coordinate activities of nurses, students, assistants, specialists, therapists, and other medical…. Across both published task lists that is about 15% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: You would be starting most of it from nothing: about 15% of the durable work in that job is work you do today, and the rest you would be learning while the bills carried on. It is a pay cut, in those words: $210,040 against your $559,030, 62.4% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Family Medicine Physicians
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already direct and coordinate activities of nurses, assistants, specialists, residents, and other medical staff, and their equivalent is to direct and coordinate activities of nurses, students, assistants, specialists, therapists, and other medical…. Across both published task lists that is about 13% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: You would be starting most of it from nothing: about 13% of the durable work in that job is work you do today, and the rest you would be learning while the bills carried on. It is a pay cut, in those words: $244,180 against your $559,030, 56.3% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
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: 0% of its task weight, across 18 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The headlines about your trade disappearing
They are usually about the technology, not the timetable. Changes to work like examining fetuses, infants, children and adolescents and diagnosing health issues to determine need for intervention, such as surgery 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 Specialist medical practitioners and consultants 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 Specialist medical practitioners and consultants. 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.
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:
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
Free
Why there is no community here
Collab365, who build this site, run paid Spaces for a small number of subjects, and none of them is built for this job. We are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.
So the free services listed on this page are the whole answer, and it is the same answer we would give a friend.
Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for pediatric surgeons 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 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 Pediatric Surgeons?
- Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 18 official task statements scored for Pediatric Surgeons (United States, SOC 29-1243), 0% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 16 out of 100 (range 12–22, band: minimal). 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 “Pediatric Surgeons” can AI already do?
- The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Prepare case histories” (56/100, partial); “Refer patient to medical specialist or other practitioners when necessary” (48/100, partial); “Interpret results of preoperative tests and physical examinations” (47/100, partial). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
- Which tasks in “Pediatric Surgeons” stay human?
- About 78% 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: “Perform transplantation operations, such as organ transplants, on fetuses, infants, children, and adolescents” (0/100, minimal); “Operate on fetuses, infants, children, and adolescents to correct deformities, repair injuries, prevent and treat diseases, or improve or restore patients' f…” (0/100, minimal); “Follow established surgical techniques during the operation” (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 “Pediatric Surgeons” do about AI?
- Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 0% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 78% 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 Pediatric Surgeons calculated?
- Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 18 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.
Where these numbers come from
About the data on this page
- O*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
- The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
- 10 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-with-imputed)
- 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.
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}
}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.