Navigating AI in Medical Laboratory Education

The Clinical Laboratory Educators Conference (CLEC) Steering Committee is pleased to announce the plenary session for CLEC 2026 will feature Nadine Lerret, PhD, MLS(ASCP)^CM, and her presentation, “Responsible Use of AI for Educators” on February 6, at 9:15 am Pacific.

Generative AI tools are already influencing how students learn, study, and prepare for professional practice. However, responsible AI integration requires more than simply adopting new technologies—it demands a thoughtful, ethical, and transparent approach to teaching and assessment.

In this plenary session, Dr. Lerret will draw on recent survey data examining student use of AI in healthcare and laboratory science education to explore how educators can:

• Promote ethical and responsible use of AI in the classroom
• Design transparent assessments that encourage learning, not shortcuts
• Engage students as informed and critical users of AI tools
• Incorporate AI into active learning strategies that align with professional expectations

This session will offer practical insights for faculty, administrators, and program leaders navigating the rapidly evolving role of AI in education.

About the Speaker

Dr. Lerret serves as Associate Dean of Academic and AI Integration in the College of Health Sciences at RUSH University, as well as Associate Professor and Program Director in the Department of Medical Laboratory Science.

She is recognized for her innovative teaching strategies and early adoption of generative AI technologies. Her work has positioned her as a leader in leveraging AI to improve learning outcomes while preparing students to responsibly use these tools in their future professional roles within healthcare and laboratory science.

Join Us at CLEC 2026

CLEC 2026 will be held February 5-7 in Bellevue, Washington, near Seattle. Registrants have the option to attend in-person or virtually. Register by January 21 to get the regular rate and save $60 off the onsite/late registration rate.

Your Voice Needed in January to Stop Lab Cuts | Call for Nominations for National Positions | Enhance Your Professional Development at CLEC 2026 | Save the Dates for 2026 Events | and More

Your Voice is Needed in January to Stop Lab Cuts and Protect Patient Care

Devastating reimbursement cuts under the Protecting Access to Medicare Act (PAMA) will be implemented on February 1, if no action is taken by Congress before the end of next January.

Be prepared to contact your members of Congress in January—especially Senate democrats—to support the RESULTS Act. This will require all hands on deck!

StopLabCuts.org includes an easy-to-use TAKE ACTION platform, and many helpful resources to use and share.

Free Webinar – The Stakes of PAMA Reform: Navigating Policy, Advocacy, and Next Steps

January 8, 1 pm ET

Sign up

Join ASCLS and the American Clinical Laboratory Association (ACLA) for a timely webinar on what is at stake if Congress fails to act on reforming PAMA before January 31, 2026.

The webinar will explore the impact of reductions of up to 15 percent on more than 700 tests on the Medicare Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule and onerous data reporting that would require laboratories to submit private payer data from 2019. Participants will receive an overview of how reporting might function, who must report, and what it could mean for laboratories, the workforce, and the patients who rely on timely, accurate results.

Those on the ground in Washington will explain reform efforts sought by a broad coalition of clinical laboratory stakeholders who are advocating for the RESULTS Act, using the Stop Lab Cuts campaign to advance this legislation. Speakers will break down what the RESULTS Act would do, why action is urgently needed, and how laboratories, professionals, and advocates can effectively engage policymakers.

Featured speakers include:

• Susan Van Meter, President, ACLA
• Patrick Cooney, President, The Federal Group, Inc.
• Joyce Gresko, Partner, Alston & Bird, ACLA General Counsel

This webinar is free for all to attend.

ASCLS is approved as a provider of continuing education programs in the clinical laboratory sciences by the ASCLS P.A.C.E.^® Program.

Become a Labvocate Ambassador

If you’re interested in getting more involved in efforts to support the profession, join the Labvocate Ambassador Program. This growing network of passionate medical laboratory professionals committed to strengthening the voice and visibility of the clinical laboratory community.

More than 60 ambassadors have already signed up. Our goal is to have 538 ambassadors—one for every member of Congress and every senator. Join the movement.

Call for Nominations for National Positions

Nominations Due January 15

The Nominations Committee is seeking qualified members interested in serving in an elected national position (term to begin on July 2, 2026). If you or someone you know should be nominated, apply online or contact Nominations Committee Chair Mark De Luna by January 15, 2026.

Leadership positions to be elected in 2025:

• President-elect (three-year commitment, automatically succeeding to President and Past President)
• Director (three positions, three-year term)
• Nominations Committee (three positions, two-year term)
• Judicial Committee (one position, five-year term)

Learn more about each position’s eligibility requirements and duties.

Support Your Students’ Success and Enhance Your Professional Development at CLEC 2026

February 5-7 | Bellevue, WA | Virtual

Sign up by Jan 21

Every year, the 2026 Clinical Laboratory Educators Conference (CLEC), brings together a vibrant community of educators who share ideas, swap practical tools, and leave inspired to elevate their programs.

This year’s Opening Keynote, “Trauma-Informed in Pedagogy & Practice,” will discuss how common neurobiological factors can impact student success, explore trauma-informed teaching approaches, and walk through real-world scenarios.

Whether it’s innovative teaching tools, fresh strategies to engage students, or the invaluable support of colleagues who truly understand the challenges of laboratory education, CLEC offers something that resonates long after the conference ends.

Join nearly 500 of your peers who have already signed up, February 5-7 in Bellevue, Washington, or virtually. Regular registration ends Jan 21.

Save the Dates for 2026 Events

Mid-Year ASCLS House of Delegates Meeting

January 18, 2 pm ET | Virtual

ASCLS will hold its sixth annual mid-year virtual meeting of the House of Delegates (HOD) on Sunday, January 18, at 2 pm Eastern. The agenda includes:

• President’s Update
• Finance Update
• Elections Committee
• Advocacy Agenda
• Constituent Society Policy
• Bylaws Regarding Regional Councils

Delegates, who began their term with the first session of the 2025-2026 House of Delegates in June 2025, will attend the meeting through a unique Zoom link sent directly to them. Any ASCLS member can watch the livestream on YouTube. Additional details will be shared on ASCLS Connect in January.

11th Annual ASCLS Lab Week Run

April 19-25, 2026

Step out of your labs and into your communities to help spread the word about the medical laboratory profession by participating in the ASCLS Lab Week Virtual Run.

This virtual race can be completed any time during Medical Laboratory Professionals Week (April 19-25, 2026) and anywhere. Participants can walk, use a treadmill, run outside, or even ride a bike to complete the 5K distance (or 3.1 miles). Organize a group run with friends and family, or go solo.

Race packets will go on sale January 1 with Early Bird Pricing available through February 15. All proceeds go to scholarships that help medical laboratory professionals attend ASCLS meetings, advocate for the profession, and become future leaders in the field.

Race organizers are currently looking for sponsors. If you or someone you know is interested in reaching thousands of laboratory professionals, please contact info@labweekrun.com.

2026 ASCLS, AGT & SAFMLS Joint Annual Meeting (JAM)

June 28-July 2 | St. Louis or Virtual

ASCLS, the Association of Genetic Technologists (AGT), and Society of American Federal Medical Laboratory Scientists (SAFMLS) come together each summer for JAM, the premier gathering of laboratory professionals to share their knowledge, research, and best practices related to the field of laboratory science.

• Learn from about 50 P.A.C.E.^®-approved scientific sessions from all three organizations.
• Network and socialize with peers from across the country and around the world.
• Explore exhibit booths from a wide range of industry partners.
• Attend in-person or virtually, and access session recordings for at least 30 days after the event.

Put it on your 2026 calendar, and get those PTO requests in soon.

2026 ASCLS Awards Open for Nominations

Submit Nominations by March 15

Each year, ASCLS honors the medical laboratory professionals who make our Society stronger, our profession more vibrant, and our patient care better. A wide range of awards are open now, offering meaningful opportunities for recognition, career advancement, and professional visibility.

Submit your nominations for the following awards by March 15.

• Ascending Professional Leadership and Achievement Awards
• Community Engagement Award
• Developing Professional Leadership and Achievement Awards
• Pinnacle Award
• Scientific Research Award
• Theriot Award (for media and equipment development)

Details for applying for these awards and the link to submit applications are on the Awards and Scholarships webpage. Questions can be addressed to awards@ascls.org.

Recognizing excellence strengthens the entire profession. Encourage your colleagues—and yourself—to apply or nominate deserving members. The ASCLS Awards Ceremony will be held June 30 at the 2026 ASCLS, AGT & SAFMLS Joint Annual Meeting in St. Louis.

New CLEF Impactful Innovation in Education Award

Applications Due December 31

The Clinical Laboratory Educators Forum (CLEF) is excited to announce the launch of a brand-new award celebrating innovation and excellence in clinical laboratory science education: Impactful Innovation in Education Award.

This award recognizes educators who are transforming the learning experience through innovative strategies, tools, or approaches that significantly enhance student engagement, understanding, and success in the clinical laboratory sciences.

If you’ve developed an innovative educational tool or approach that addresses a critical need in clinical laboratory education and have shared this innovation with the broader educator community, please consider applying for this award.

Recipients will be honored at the Clinical Laboratory Educators Conference (CLEC) with a placard and a $500 monetary award. Learn more.

ASCLS Education & Research Fund Raises Over $650 for Grants and Scholarship

Thank you to everyone who participated in the ASCLS Education & Research Fund, Inc., Handmade for the Holidays fundraiser. The event raised over $650 for ASCLS member research grants and scholarships for students in clinical laboratory science programs.

Established in 1953, the fund supports scholarships for clinical laboratory science students and funds research in laboratory science to be used for pilot studies, preliminary data collection, and early grants for investigators new to research.

Share Your Story in a Book Honoring Lab Medicine during COVID-19

Submit by January 1

The editors of the upcoming title, Emergent: COVID-19 Narratives of Laboratory Medicine, are holding a limited open call for first-person narratives (approximately 1,500-4,500 words) which reflect on the experience working in the laboratory during the height of the pandemic.

Whether your story highlights personal and professional challenges, failures, perseverance, teamwork, personal growth, or a moment that’s stayed with you, this book aims to share laboratory medicine’s voice and recognize the essential and heroic role of diagnostics.

The best personal narratives don’t just recount events—they invite reflection, stir empathy, and leave the readership with a lingering sense of connection or insight. It’s this balance of honesty, storytelling, and self-awareness that makes a personal narrative unforgettable. If you’re interested in contributing, please upload your submission by January 1, 2026.

Voices Under 40

Spotlight: Tami Alpaugh, MS, PhD, MLS(ASCP), Lakeville, Minnesota

Tami is an assistant professor at the University of Minnesota. Tami’s teaching responsibilities include transfusion medicine lectures and laboratories in the graduate MLS program. Tami is also developing coursework to recruit future MLS students, and one course is entitled, “Pop Culture and Disease.”

Tami has been active in ASCLS-Minnesota for the past few years, serving on the Finance Committee, serving as treasurer, and co-chairing registration and finance for the ASCLS-MN regional collaborative laboratory conference. Read more.

ASCLS Voices Under 40 honors ASCLS members who have shown exceptional commitment to the Society, the laboratory profession, and their community at large at a younger age in their professional career. Each month we spotlight one of the shining voices who was selected from many nominations across the country.

New Off the Bench Podcast Episode

Subscribe to the Off the Bench Podcast for discussions on scientific and not-so-scientific ideas in laboratory medicine. New episodes drop the last Friday of each month.

On the November 28 episode, host Doryan Redding sat down with ASCLS President Kyle Riding, Past President Pat Tille, and Leadership Development Committee Vice Chair Nickola Chin to explore communication in the clinical laboratory, from feedback loops to leadership strategies. Hear what it really takes to be heard behind the closed doors of the laboratory.

Subscribe to the podcast through Apple Podcasts , Spotify, or your favorite podcast app.

Latest Jobs

Chair – Associate Professor or Professor
UT Health San Antonio
San Antonio, Texas

Tenure Track Open Rank Faculty/Medical Laboratory Science Program Director
University of Massachusetts Lowell
Lowell, Massachusetts

Clinical Laboratory Technician
Trenton Psychiatric Hospital
Trenton, New Jersey

See more job openings on the ASCLS Career Center.

Local Events

ASCLS-Arkansas and Arkansas Antimicrobial Stewardship Foundation Webinar
January 14
Speeding Toward Stewardship: Leveraging Rapid Diagnostics for Optimized Antimicrobial Utilization and Patient Outcomes
Virtual

ASCLS-Colorado Winter Seminar
January 16
Grand Junction, Colorado

Minnesota Clinical Laboratory Collaborative
March 19-20
Saint Paul, Minnesota

Missouri-Kansas Joint Conference and Exhibits
April 8-9
Overland Park, Kansas

ASCLS-Texas Annual State Convention
April 8-10
San Antonio, Texas

ASCLS-Michigan Annual Conference
April 12-14
Mount Pleasant, Michigan

Key Dates

Webinar – The Stakes of PAMA Reform: Navigating Policy, Advocacy, and Next Steps
January 8

Mid-Year ASCLS House of Delegates Meeting
Virtual
January 18

Clinical Laboratory Educators Conference Regular Registration Deadline
January 21

Addressing Student Success Through a Trauma-Informed Lens

The CLEC Steering Committee is excited to announce the 2026 Clinical Laboratory Educators Conference (CLEC) Opening Keynote will feature Jeanie Tietjen, PhD, and her presentation, “Trauma-Informed in Pedagogy & Practice“ on Thursday, February 5, at 12 pm Pacific.

As educators, administrators, and program leaders, we are increasingly aware that student learning is deeply connected to well-being. Dr. Tietjen will explore the growing importance of trauma-informed approaches in higher education and how they can positively impact student success, engagement, and persistence.

The session will begin with an overview of the rationale for trauma-informed pedagogy and practice, followed by practical examples educators can apply in their own programs. Participants will gain insight into:

• Basic neurobiological factors that influence learning and common challenges to student success
• Trauma-informed pedagogical strategies and classroom practices
• Real-world scenarios educators face in higher education
• Practical tools and resources, including guidance for syllabi, attendance policies, and late-work policies

This keynote is designed to help educators build more supportive, transparent, and effective learning environments—without compromising academic rigor.

About the Speaker

Jeanie Tietjen, PhD, is a Professor of English at MassBay Community College and Director of the Institute for Trauma, Adversity, and Resilience in Higher Education. With more than 20 years of teaching experience across diverse settings—including colleges and universities, prisons, and homeless shelters—Dr. Tietjen brings a deep, practice-informed perspective to trauma-informed education.

Through her work, she serves as a national resource for educators seeking to better understand how trauma, adversity, and resilience intersect with teaching and learning in higher education.

Join Us at CLEC 2026

CLEC 2026 will be held February 5-7 in Bellevue, Washington, near Seattle. Registrants have the option to attend in-person or virtually. Register by January 21 to get the regular rate and save $60 off the onsite/late registration rate.

Every year, the Clinical Laboratory Educators Conference (CLEC) brings together a vibrant community of educators who share ideas, swap practical tools, and leave inspired to elevate their programs. The stories below—from program directors who once felt overwhelmed, to seasoned educators who still discover something new each year—show just how transformative CLEC can be. Whether it’s innovative teaching tools, fresh strategies to engage students, or the invaluable support of colleagues who truly understand the challenges of laboratory education, CLEC offers something that resonates long after the conference ends.

CLEC 2026 will be held February 5-7 at the Hyatt Regency Bellevue in Bellevue, Washington, near Seattle. Attend in-person or virtually. Regular registration ends January 21! Save your spot!

James C. Williams Jr., PhD, MLS(AMT), MLT(ASCP), MLT and Phlebotomy Program Director at St. Philip’s College, San Antonio, TX

Jennifer Lichamer, MPH, CHES, MLS(ASCP), Director of Clinical Lab Technology AAS Program, Histotechnology AAS Program, and Histotechnology VS Certificate Program, Elgin Community College, Elgin, IL

Attendees at the 2025 Clinical Laboratory Educators Conference share experiences and best practices.

For the first two years I attended CLEC, I felt completely overwhelmed and wasn’t sure where to start because everything was so new. I’d like to shout-out to Stephanie Cochrane and April Orange for sitting down with me and walking me through the expectations for a program director, how to find and use the resources in place to assist new directors and educators, and for sharing their wisdom and support.

The people I have met through the CLEC convention are all there to help strengthen their programs, incorporate best practices for their students, and support each other and the profession. I found that the third CLEC meeting was the charm for me; I felt like I was better able to prioritize which sessions best suited the gaps I was experiencing and settle in. One session I attend discussed how to use choice boards as an opportunity to engage students with the course content in different ways. I adopted this activity this fall and the feedback I am getting from the students is that they appreciate the nudge to really dig into the material with fresh eyes, in a way that works best for them. They even got a little competitive about their projects (in a very friendly way).

Candice Grayson, MS, MA, MLS(ASCP)^CM, Program Director, MLT & HT, Community College of Baltimore County, Baltimore, MD
CLEC 2026 Steering Committee Chair

Stephanie Cochrane presents at the 2024 Clinical Laboratory Educators Conference.

I am so excited to attend and encourage you to, as well. Last year, I used a tool that Stephanie Cochrane had mentioned in one of her sessions the year prior, “Cellfies,” while I attended CLEC my students were gathering selfies and relating them to hematology cells. The students loved playing and learning, and I loved that the learning was continuing for both (student and teacher).

Volume 39 Number 6 | December 2025

Summary

The authors argue that casual stereotypes about medical laboratory professionals—such as calling them introverts or saying they don’t like people—undermine inclusion and belonging. These labels flatten the profession’s diversity and can alienate colleagues. They urge intentional, respectful language and highlight ASCLS efforts that foster community, emphasizing that belonging is built through everyday actions that value each person’s full humanity.

Kyle B. Riding, PhD, MLS(ASCP)^CM, ASCLS President

Laura Link, MS, MLS(ASCP)^CM, ASCLS-Virginia President

If you’ve spent any time in the laboratory profession, you’ve likely heard or said that we are understaffed, underpaid, or underappreciated. And while those challenges are important to acknowledge and recognize, there is another issue that deserves our attention. It’s the way we talk about ourselves—more specifically the way we label each other.

Shortly after this year’s ASCLS, AGT & SAFMLS Joint Annual Meeting, I had the pleasure of getting a phone call from my friend and this article’s co-author, Laura Link. She was frustrated by how often she heard folks casually referring to laboratory professionals as “introverts” or joking that “we are hermits who don’t like people.” Laura, who is anything but introverted, felt misrepresented and that she wasn’t alone.

While I understood her point, I also offered a gentle defense, since I’m proudly introverted myself. I reminded her that society labels introverts as isolationists, but our energy is simply restored when we have solitude. Our extroverted peers find their energy in social settings. Neither is better or worse, but for some reason introversion does carry a societal stigma that drove Laura’s feelings. Those sentiments led us to want to collaborate on this article.

We went on to talk about how these well-intentioned and humorous labels can be limiting. They flatten the rich diversity of personalities, backgrounds, and experiences that make our profession strong. As our conversation continued, the topic naturally drifted away from the merits of introversion and extroversion and instead became about how we use language to define others without their input. It is our deeply held belief that ASCLS is a space where a sense of belonging can be built. However, we both worry that when we define others without their consent, a sense of belonging can be lost.

With that all in mind, let’s be honest: no one enters healthcare because they dislike people. Some may prefer quieter workspaces, but that doesn’t mean a person lacks communication skills or a collaborative spirit. Everyone simply expresses their care and commitment to excellence in different ways.

“Let’s be intentional with our words and assure we do not label each other based on personality traits, preferences, or outdated stereotypes.”

So why do we keep repeating these stereotypes that we may have no data to support? Maybe it’s habit. Maybe it’s a way to bond. Maybe it’s simply a joke learned through social norms in the profession. But here’s the problem: when we label the greater whole as one thing, we risk excluding others who don’t fit that label. We create invisible boundaries around who belongs and who doesn’t. And in a profession that already expresses concerns for recognition, we can’t afford to push anyone to the margins.

Belonging isn’t just a buzzword—it’s a foundation. It’s what keeps students engaged, professionals motivated, and teams resilient. It’s what allows innovation to flourish and patient care to improve. And it starts with how we treat each other.

At ASCLS, we’ve made belonging a priority. Our Diversity Advocacy Council—which Laura has been a leader for—continues to lead conversations around inclusion and representation. The Labvocate Action Center empowers members to advocate for policies that reflect our values. Our constituent societies offer spaces for connection, mentorship, and growth. These aren’t just programs—they’re lifelines. They remind us that we’re part of something bigger than ourselves and that we can bring our whole selves into those spaces safely and bravely.

But belonging isn’t built by our governance or programs alone. It’s built in everyday moments: the way we welcome a new colleague, the way we listen to a student’s concerns, or the way we bravely challenge assumptions in a meeting. It’s built when we choose respect over ridicule.

We have both seen what happens when we get this right. We have watched students blossom because someone believed in them, and we’ve seen professionals rediscover their passion because they felt seen and heard. These moments matter. They’re the quiet victories that sustain us. And yes, sometimes it feels like pouring a thimble of water into the ocean. But if we keep lifting each other up, we will raise the tide. We’ll build a profession where everyone belongs.

So, here’s our ask: let’s be intentional with our words and assure we do not label each other based on personality traits, preferences, or outdated stereotypes. Let’s recognize the full humanity of our colleagues and create spaces where people can be loud or quiet, analytical or creative, and introverted or extroverted. But most importantly, in these spaces, they feel valued.

We are not defined by labels. We are defined by our impact—and our impact grows when we build each other up. So, the next time you’re tempted to make a joke about how “lab people don’t like people,” pause and think about the student or colleague who’s listening. Think about the patient who’s depending on us. Then choose a different story—one that reflects the truth of who we are. We are scientists, caregivers, educators, advocates, and innovators. We are introverts and extroverts and everything in between. And we belong here. Let’s make sure everyone of us knows it.

Kyle B. Riding is Clinical Associate Professor & Program Director at the University of New Hampshire in Durham, New Hampshire.

Laura Link is MLS Program Director and Assistant Professor at Radford University in Radford, Virginia.

Volume 39 Number 6 | December 2025

Summary

The author, a data-driven perfectionist, shares why discussing DEIB feels uncomfortable yet essential. Drawing on veterinary and clinical laboratory experience, she argues that growth requires practice, safe spaces, and grace for mistakes. She proposes using structured methods like SOAP to improve DEIB communication and metrics within ASCLS, emphasizing that avoiding the conversation is not an option.

The Article I Didn’t Want to Write

Heather Herrington, DVM, MLS(ASCP)^CM, ASCLS Director

I have a confession: I hate talking about diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB).

Before anyone assembles a mob equipped with pitchforks to come at me, please let me explain. I suspect a lot of what I have to say might resonate with you.

First and foremost, I am a medical laboratory scientist. I appreciate procedures and policies and job aides. Calibration curves that fit perfectly bring me joy. My department is flow cytometry, and when I run QC on the Lyric and it’s green rather than blue, my heart smiles. Neither is a failure, but green is better. I want objective data with a standard deviation. Generally, this does not happen with DEIB discussions.

Second, my original career was as a veterinarian. This might be where some folks cannot fully relate, but bear with me. As a clinician, I wanted treatments and cures to fix the problem. When it came to interacting with patients, one of the first techniques I learned was the SOAP method. This was a strategy to evaluate a patient that could easily be passed on to a doctor on the following shift, to ensure continuity of care. As an example, each time I interacted with a patient, I’d document the following: Subjective data (lethargic, tender abdomen), Objective data (24 hours post splenectomy, febrile, elevated heart and respiratory rate, leukocytosis, anemic, hypertensive), Assessment (rule out post-operative bleed vs sepsis), Plan (abdominal ultrasound).

“No matter what, though, simply not talking about DEIB because it makes us uncomfortable isn’t a solution.”

As a methodology, it was incredibly effective. With fairly stable patients, this could be done once a day. In more critical patients, this might be performed every hour, if not more often, because that level of feedback was required. The first time I ever had to do this, it was awful. It took me forever and I was terrified I’d miss something. After I’d done it 50 times, it was substantially easier. After 1,000 times, I was still nervous because that never goes away, but confident. We’ll come back to this.

Lastly, as a child, I was in my school’s gifted and talented program. I don’t want to diminish what I gained, because it was an incredible opportunity to be surrounded by my peers. However, it left me with a tendency to be a perfectionist who vehemently dislikes looking like I am not the expert in the room. And when it comes to DEIB, if you are an active participant, as opposed to just sitting silently in the corner, you will inevitably put your foot into your mouth with such enthusiasm that you kick yourself in your uvula, probably multiple times. This is a painful part of the learning process, but it does get easier.

So here I am—a data-driven perfectionist who wants a procedure for how to move forward. (This is the part where I thought it might resonate with some folks. Anyone?)

What happens now?

I strongly dislike the phrase “embrace the suck.” I feel like it can be easily weaponized and used to force people to deal with situations that could simply be made healthier. So, let’s avoid that.

When it comes to discussing issues around DEIB, if you’re just getting your feet wet, you need to find a safe environment. You’ll need to broaden your horizons eventually, but for right now, start small. When you say something dumb, and I can almost guarantee you will, do so in a group that won’t wreck your willingness to take future risks in a less friendly setting. But keep pushing your boundaries. After I’d SOAP’ed 50 patients, it got easier for me. But you must get through those initial discussions. Give yourself grace and recognize how incredibly difficult and awkward it can be. Growth is often uncomfortable, but it’s the only way to get to a better place.

When it comes to ASCLS, I feel like the SOAP method could be utilized here. Specifically, it could be a way for the Diversity Advocacy Council, the Board of Directors, and the DEIB Taskforce to communicate with each other, especially as goals are established, revised, and improved. The feedback might not be immediate, but it could still be a tool. Right now, we have subjective data from members, and objective data can be obtained. A while back, the Board talked about having demographic data being a required field for members, with “prefer to not answer” as an option. Over time, tracking the percentage of members who choose that option could be a way to determine how safe people feel to disclose, which is valuable as an objective DEIB metric. And my hope is that ASCLS obtains additional objective metrics from the DEIB Taskforce.

The DEIB Taskforce was established a couple of years ago, and I am looking forward to seeing what comes out of that group. In the past, ASCLS has benefited immensely from taskforces, and I hope this one will continue the trend. Ideally, they will help the organization drill down on what objective data needs to be collected and evaluated, then clearly define what the goals should be and help establish a strategy to get us there.

No matter what, though, simply not talking about DEIB because it makes us uncomfortable isn’t a solution.

Heather Herrington is a Medical Laboratory Scientist in the Department of Flow Cytometry and Immunology at the University of Vermont Medical Center in Burlington, Vermont.

Volume 39 Number 6 | December 2025

Summary

This article highlights the impact of inclusion in clinical laboratories, especially for LGBTQ+ professionals and patients. The author shares experiences of witnessing bias and emphasizes how discrimination harms both teamwork and patient care. Feeling genuinely welcomed at the ASCLS, AGT & SAFMLS Joint Annual Meeting reinforced the importance of diversity, belonging, and supportive professional communities in strengthening the medical laboratory workforce.

Breanna Mckenna, MLT(ASCP), ASCLS Developing Professionals Forum Counselor

The ASCLS, AGT & SAFMLS Joint Annual Meeting was a new experience for author Beanna Mckenna that was inspiring and moving in terms of welcoming all medical laboratory professionals.

It was the last day of the trip. I hadn’t slept well all week. I was nervous about the upcoming day of travel I had ahead of me. But none of these worries could be blamed for my teary eyes in a conference room in Sacramento, California, on June 12.

Being a queer person in 2025 in healthcare is fraught with anxiety, and that is true for not only our patients, but for the professionals at work. I remember the first time I heard nurses on the floor demeaning and misgendering a transgender patient just a few feet from the door and, unbeknownst to them, just a few feet away from me, another genderqueer individual. Unfortunately, this behavior is not absent from the lab.

The transgender community ends up visiting the lab frequently, as hormone therapies must be carefully monitored. Even when bias is not visible to the patient during their visit, it can be felt behind the bench. Many times, I have witnessed disturbing conversations revolving around patient’s pronouns, the tests ordered, and implications about their lives.

As a clinical laboratory professional who is nonbinary, this is heartbreaking to hear. Imagine opening the wrong door and hearing the technologist on the other side calling you a slur, loudly proclaiming that “men don’t need a beta-hCG,” or that you can’t be called Jennifer and get your prostate specific antigen checked. When I hear these conversations, or see sneers on faces, it feels as though they are directed at me. Our patients can feel our prejudices, but so can our coworkers.

When we prioritize diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging in our laboratories, we are benefiting our patients and our peers at the same time. The more diverse our workforce is, the more perspectives we hear, and the more ideas are brought to the table. As a phlebotomist, I never shied away from asking someone else to take a second look at a patient—even if they had less experience than me—because “your eyes might see something I can’t.” Our differences, our unique lived experiences, offer individual insights into our work, but if I’m working on the bench next to someone who is loudly and consistently discriminating against others in my community, am I going to have the courage to share my ideas?

“I was sitting in a room of primarily strangers, but I felt like I belonged.”

In January, I started the last semester of my MLT degree, and I was given an assignment to become a member of any professional laboratory society. We had been given assignments all month to learn about the many professional laboratory organizations out there. None piqued my interest so much as ASCLS, however. A society that values our profession, but even more so, the diverse people within it? Sign me up!

But the mission statement was not enough to prepare me for the welcome I would feel at the Joint Annual Meeting (JAM). To hear Past President Dr. Pat Tille, President-Elect Stacey Robinson, and current President Dr. Kyle Riding value inclusion so heavily in an administration and era where many underestimate its worth was so inspiring to me, it moved me to tears. I was sitting in a room of primarily strangers, but I felt like I belonged.

The past year has felt incredibly heavy for me, despite the excitement of graduating and becoming certified as a medical laboratory technician. I absolutely love the clinical laboratory, and everything we do within it. I have the biggest hopes and dreams for my career. Knowing that ASCLS will support me not only because of what I do, but because of who I am, will keep me renewing my membership and volunteering, however I can. I hope we can encourage others to do the same, for our patients and ourselves.

Breanna Mckenna is a Medical Laboratory Technician student at Western Dakota Technical College in Rapid City, South Dakota.

Volume 39 Number 6 | December 2025

Summary

This article explores the difference between fitting in and true belonging, emphasizing that belonging begins with honoring one’s authentic self. Using neuroscience and practical strategies—pausing, regulating with support, and seeking genuine connection—it encourages medical laboratory professionals to build psychological safety, reduce division, and strengthen teamwork by showing up with courage, curiosity, and self-compassion.

Julie Freidhoff, MS, MLS(ASCP), ASCLS Today Volunteer Contributor

Belonging is one of the most fundamental human needs. In neuroscience, we understand it as a core driver of safety in the brain and nervous system. When we feel that we are accepted, valued, and connected, our bodies literally shift out of a protective state and into one of openness and growth. Belonging supports our well-being, our capacity to think clearly, and even our ability to connect compassionately with patients and colleagues.

Yet, many of us confuse belonging with fitting in. Fitting in requires that we change ourselves, hide parts of who we are, and mold our values to match the group around us. Belonging, in contrast, requires us to stand firmly in our authentic identity. It is the courage to show up, imperfect and honest, as ourselves.

Brené Brown says it beautifully: “True belonging doesn’t require you to change who you are; it requires you to be who you are. But it’s also the courage to stand alone, and to belong to yourself above all else.”

In a laboratory or healthcare workplace, this distinction is vital. We spend long hours in high-pressure environments where our ability to work together can literally affect patient outcomes. But our modern culture—fueled by social media algorithms and polarization—often pushes us into “us versus them” factions. In the lab, this can look like management versus specialists, technologists versus technicians, or one shift against another. This false version of team spirit—bonding through shared dislike of “the other”—creates toxic divides. Our nervous systems pick up on the threat, and before long, protective behaviors like aggression, withdrawal, or passive resistance take hold.

So, the question is: how do we build community and foster belonging when everything around us seems to be fragmenting?

As a coach and mentor, I encourage you to begin with yourself. Belonging starts inside us, with the choice to honor our values and stay grounded in who we are. From there, we can extend connections outward in ways that build psychological safety in our teams. Here are three neuroscience-informed practices to help you begin:

1. Practice the Pause

When your nervous system is activated—your heart races, your face heats up, or your thoughts spiral into frustration—pause. This is not weakness; it is wisdom. A pause is the gift of time for your nervous system to settle.

Find a safe way to release the energy. Journal. Doodle. Take a short walk. Get those looping thoughts out of your head and onto paper. Then look at what you’ve written: do you see themes? Strong emotions? That’s your nervous system’s alarm, alerting you that a boundary has been crossed or that something deeply matters to you.

Name it to tame it. Neuroscience shows that labeling our emotions calms the amygdala and allows the prefrontal cortex—our “thinking brain”—to come back online. Once you’ve named what’s happening, offer yourself compassion. Remind yourself: My experience matters. My emotions are signals, not problems.

2. Seek Regulation or Co-Regulation

When our nervous systems are overwhelmed, regulation is essential. Sometimes this looks like self-regulation—deep breathing, grounding exercises, or a moment of quiet. Other times, we need co-regulation: the calm presence of another person who helps us feel safe.

This is where mentorship can be powerful. Seek someone outside of your immediate work unit—a trusted colleague, a mentor in your professional society, or even a friend who listens without judgment. Sharing your experience with someone outside the immediate workplace helps you gain perspective and allows your nervous system to settle in a neutral, supportive space.

Professional organizations like ASCLS are rich with opportunities for mentorship and connection. These relationships expand your lens, offering both wisdom and emotional steadiness when workplace dynamics feel destabilizing.

3. Seek Connection

Once you’ve grounded yourself, courageously step toward connection. Offer choices in your interactions. Approach a colleague with curiosity, not for the sake of debate or rebuttal, but for genuine understanding. Neuroscience shows that when we listen deeply, without judgment, we create safety cues that invite others out of defensiveness and into authentic dialogue.

Ask open-ended questions. Listen not just to words, but to tone, body language, and what’s underneath. Your goal is not to win an argument but to build a bridge of understanding. This doesn’t mean abandoning your values. It means leading with relational safety.

In these moments, your prefrontal cortex—the seat of empathy, reasoning, and problem-solving—becomes fully engaged. And when your colleagues experience being seen and heard by you, even across differences, it can shift the energy of the entire team.

Standing in True Belonging

True belonging requires courage. It asks you to show up as your authentic self—even when it would be easier to hide behind conformity or align with the loudest faction. It asks you to stand alone, if necessary, rooted in your own values. But paradoxically, when you do this, you often discover that others were waiting for someone to model authenticity first.

As laboratory medicine professionals, we know that every test we perform and every interaction we have contributes to patient safety and care. But just as importantly, the way we show up for one another matters. When we cultivate belonging—not fitting in—we create workplaces where people feel safe to think, question, and contribute their best.

So, I encourage you:

• Pause when your nervous system is triggered.
• Seek regulation and support.
• Then step toward connection with courage and curiosity.
• And above all, belong to yourself first.

May you be brave enough to share your authentic, imperfect self. In doing so, you will not only honor your own values but also light the way for others—igniting a culture of true belonging in laboratory medicine and beyond.

Julie Freidhoff is a Coach and Consultant at SafeSpace Coaching and Consulting in Rochester, Minnesota.

Volume 39 Number 6 | December 2025

Summary

This article explains how integrating diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) strengthens laboratory teams, reduces burnout, and improves patient care. Through supportive leadership, cross-training, psychological safety, and clear communication, medical laboratories build trust, resilience, and collaboration. Applying DEIB principles creates healthier workplace culture and more effective, connected healthcare teams.

Dhara Parekh, MS, MLS in Leadership, ASCLS Today Volunteer Contributor

Clinical laboratories play a critical role in the healthcare system, operating in hospitals, clinics, urgent care centers, and reference facilities (Bayot, Lopes, & Zubair, 2024). Patient samples travel through multiple departments, including phlebotomists, technologists, supervisors, and pathologists. Every handoff depends on accuracy, clear communication, and trust. When any link in this chain weakens, all departments face consequences, and patient care can suffer.

Collaboration among healthcare professionals, including nurses, physicians, and pharmacists, is essential to deliver prompt results and safe and effective care. Strengthening these connections requires more than technical skill—it demands leadership that promotes respect, inclusion, and teamwork. Applying principles of diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) helps build strong, connected teams that can perform effectively under pressure (Marshall et al., 2023).

Laboratory professionals often work long shifts of 10 to 12 hours under heavy workloads. During flu season, our team faced a flood of samples that pushed both our ability and strength to the limit. Miscommunication during one shift caused delayed results and increased stress and tension among team members. Experiences like this demonstrate how quickly burnout can develop and the importance of effective leadership and supportive practices.

“Teams that prioritize DEIB manage changing workloads, adopt modern technologies, and meet clinical challenges, while supportive leadership strengthens teamwork, reduces burnout, and improves patient care.”

Burnout often appears as exhaustion, cynicism, or a sense of helplessness that undermines morale and performance (Nowrouzi-Kia, Chai, & Casole, 2022). Laboratory culture often expects staff to perform continuously without errors, even though supporting peak concentration for extended periods is impossible. Leaders who prioritize rest, psychological safety, and team support make a real difference. Integrating DEIB into daily operations strengthens team resilience, encourages collaboration, and improves both staff well-being and patient care (Marshall et al., 2023).

At my urgent care facility, staff manage low- to moderate-complexity testing in-house while sending high-complexity tests to reference laboratories. Because patient volume fluctuates in this walk-in setting, employees share time across departments as needed. All staff are trained in emergencies and high-volume situations regardless of their primary role. I am trained to take vitals for all ages, perform EKGs, collect patient histories, and shadow providers for small procedures such as wound sample collections, biopsies, KOH and wet prep collection, and laceration care. I am also certified in CPR, commercial client’s drug screening, and breath alcohol testing.

This cross-training approach promotes diversity and inclusion by valuing each team member’s ability to contribute across multiple roles and perspectives. Leadership encourages staff to help wherever needed while respecting each department’s responsibilities, ensuring equity by sharing workloads according to established policies. During flu season or high-volume months, employees step in to support workflow even when demand exceeds capacity. Leaders actively support these efforts by providing extra staff and offering incentives, showing belonging by recognizing contributions and caring for staff well-being. These practices show how operational demands and staffing policies intersect with the human side of laboratory work. By promoting cross-training, supporting employees by reducing burnout and errors, and acknowledging individual efforts, leadership fosters a culture grounded in DEIB. Staff feel respected, included, and motivated, which directly improves patient safety and care quality (Nowrouzi-Kia, Chai, & Casole, 2022).

During my recent graduate studies, I learned about Simon Sinek’s leadership frameworks, including Start with Why. Initially, I struggled to relate to laboratory management. Over time, I recognized their practical value for aligning DEIB into daily operations. Sinek’s Golden Circle emphasizes starting with “Why,” or the organization’s purpose, before “How” (processes) and “What” (outcomes; Sinek, 2009). In the laboratory, the “Why” extends beyond producing accurate test result, it means serving patients, supporting colleagues, and promoting fairness in healthcare. For example, our urgent care team begins each day with a short huddle that frames our shared purpose as serving patients first. When DEIB aligns with this purpose, teams value not only technical skill but also the diverse experiences and perspectives of staff. Practical steps such as mentoring programs, flexible scheduling, and transparent communication reinforce inclusion and belonging.

The “Circle of Safety” emphasizes the leader’s responsibility to build secure and supportive environments (Sinek, 2009). Staff should feel confident discussing errors, propose improvements, and share ideas without fear of criticism. Leaders support trust by addressing microaggressions and exclusion directly, creating a workplace where respect and collaboration are expected (Yan, Zhang, Akhtar, & Liang, 2023). Leaders who show consistent behavior set the standard for teams in which all members feel valued.

The “Infinite Game” underscores that DEIB requires an ongoing commitment rather than a one-time effort (Sinek, 2009). Laboratories measure success through continuous progress, adaptability, and resilience. Teams that adopt this mindset collaborate effectively, adjust to changing workloads, and sustain high-quality patient care over time. In my urgent care lab, we apply this principle by refreshing cross-training annually, ensuring staff can flexibly cover shifts during peak periods. This approach supports the long-term development of resilient, inclusive teams.

In practice, integrating leadership principles with DEIB makes a visible difference. When staff feel respected, included, and that they belong, they are more engaged and resilient. For example, during peak flu season, leadership staggered breaks and provided rotating coverage to ensure no one worked a full 12-hour shift without relief. These adjustments improved morale and reduced errors. Teams that prioritize DEIB manage changing workloads, adopt modern technologies, and meet clinical challenges, while supportive leadership strengthens teamwork, reduces burnout, and improves patient care.

References

1. Bayot ML, Lopes JE, Zubair M, et al. Clinical Laboratory. [Updated 2024 Jan 26]. In: StatPearls internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/books/NBK535358.
2. Nowrouzi-Kia, B., Chai, P., & Casole, J. (2022). Burnout and mental health in medical laboratory professionals: A review. Journal of Clinical Laboratory Science, 35(4), 212–220.
3. Marshall, A. G., Vue, Z., Beasley, H. K., Neikirk, K., Stephens, D., Wanjalla, C. N., Damo, S. M., Trejo, J., Rodriguez-Aliaga, P., Headley, C. A., Shuler, H., Liu, K., Smith, N., Garza-Lopez, E., Barongan, T., Scudese, E., Spencer, E., Heemstra, J., Vazquez, A. D., Murray, S. A., … Hinton, A., Jr (2023). Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the Laboratory: Strategies to Enhance Inclusive Laboratory Culture. Molecular cell, 83(21), 3766–3772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2023.09.011.
4. Yan, Y., Zhang, J., Akhtar, M. N., & Liang, S. (2023). Positive leadership and employee engagement: The roles of state positive affect and individualism-collectivism. Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.), 42(11), 9109–9118. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02192-7
5. Sinek, Simon. (2009). Start With Why: How Great Leaders Inspire Everyone to Take Action. New York: Portfolio/Penguin.

Dhara Parekh is a Medical Laboratory Scientist at Patient First, Urgent Care in Downingtown, Pennsylvania.

Volume 39 Number 6 | December 2025

Summary

Artificial intelligence has advanced healthcare, but biased data and flawed algorithms can create inequities in diagnosis and treatment. Studies show AI tools can reinforce racial, gender, and testing-rate disparities, especially in laboratory medicine. This article urges careful development, monitoring, and transparent use of AI to ensure accuracy, fairness, and equitable patient care.

Deborah Blecker-Shelly MS, MLS(ASCP)SM^CM, DLM^CM, Patient Safety and Diagnostic Stewardship Committee Member

For those of us who remember the Hanna-Barbera futuristic sit-com, The Jetson’s, which aired from 1962 to 1963 and again from 1985 to 1987 and envisioned life in 2062, many of its predictions have come true. We have video calling, smart watches, robot maids (e.g., Roomba^®), but not yet flying cars—although we seem to be getting closer with self-driving and parking vehicles.

In the Jetson era, medical advances forecasted the future: video medical appointments (check) heart tele-monitors (check) and “pill/capsule” video endoscopy (check). The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines artificial intelligence (AI) as “the capability of computer systems and/or algorithms to imitate intelligent human behavior.” For about 10 years now, AI has been a part of our daily lives—think Alexa, Google, ChatGPT, facial recognition, etc.

In medicine, the use of AI, computer programming, and other data-driven technologies has led to great advances in healthcare. These tools can establish algorithms to refine predictions, standardize processes, and guide clinical decisions; all with the goal of providing better patient care and improving health outcomes.

However, there is a significant risk—the powerful tool of AI must be developed with great care and requires appropriate management of limitations, parameters, and labels in order to be useful, equitable, and unbiased. The development of an AI model life cycle can include many biases, with common ones across each phase, such as implicit bias, selection bias, sampling bias, validation bias, and evaluation bias.

“The bottom line is that healthcare organizations using AI to predict illness and treatment must ensure ample monitoring to eliminate bias and achieve equitable performance.”

Let’s take a look at a few examples where the use of AI led to bias and inequity in diagnostic medicine.

Racial Bias in Medical AI

Obermeyer et al. describe evidence of racial bias following use of an algorithm, such that black patients assigned the same level of clinical risk by the algorithm were sicker than white patients. This racial bias reduced the number of black patients flagged for extra health benefits by 50 percent. Less money was spent on black patients who had the same level of need, resulting in an algorithm falsely concluding that black patients were healthier than equally sick white patients. The reason the bias occurs is that the algorithm uses health costs as a proxy for health needs, so reformulating the algorithm to eliminate cost as a proxy for needs removes the racial bias in predicting who needs extra care.

A study published in PLOS Global Public Health shows that emergency department tests are 4.5 percent higher for white patients than for black patients of the same age, sex, and with the same medical complaints and emergency department triage score. Researchers expressed concern that if AI models were built using this data to guide clinician decision-making, they could reinforce pre-existing testing biases and result in substandard care for black patients. For example, clinicians might assume that black patients are less likely to get ill, when in fact they are less likely to be tested or admitted to the hospital, which is not necessarily the same thing. Under-tested subgroups of patients can lead to misrepresentation in AI models during development.

Additional Bias in Laboratory AI

Laboratory AI bias also exists in the clinical laboratory, where testing rates are a widespread source of bias in AI models for healthcare settings. Many AI models developed to predict clinical outcomes, such as sepsis, depend on laboratory test results, with untested patients often assumed to have normal results. This assumption is typically operationalized by assigning untested patients a negative label during model training. However, if laboratory testing rates differ across races, AI models may perform disparately across racial subgroups. Such models could inappropriately underestimate risk for patients in racial groups less likely to receive laboratory tests, potentially amplifying inequities in clinical care.

In a 2022 study from the United Kingdom, researchers examined state of the art AI approaches used by hospitals worldwide and found a 70 percent success rate in predicting liver disease from blood tests; however, they uncovered a wide gender gap, with 44 percent of cases in women missed compared with 23 percent of cases among men. This is one of the first reports published regarding how bias relates to AI-generated blood test diagnosis.

The bottom line is that healthcare organizations using AI to predict illness and treatment must ensure ample monitoring to eliminate bias and achieve equitable performance. Organizations must be very selective when choosing AI tools, considering the disclosure of operating characteristics, biases, and recommended uses, and exercise caution when applying them across the organization’s entire patient population.

In the evolving landscape of healthcare delivery—one increasingly influenced by AI technology—recognizing and mitigating bias is a priority. While essential for achieving accuracy and reliability in AI innovations, addressing bias is central in upholding the ethical standards of healthcare, ensuring a future where care delivery is fair and equitable.

In conclusion, the highly recommended series, The Jetsons, available on YouTube, is a show we never thought would come to life, yet it has—with artificial intelligence and futuristic developments. In the words of George Jetson, “Jane! Stop this crazy thing!”

References

1. “Artificial intelligence.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/artificial%20intelligence. Accessed 30 Sep. 2025.
2. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/digital-health/articles/10.3389/fdgth.2025.1492736/full
3. International Journal of Life Sciences, Biotechnology and Pharma Research Vol. 13, No. 8, August 2024 Online ISSN: 2250-3137 Print ISSN: 2977-0122 DOI: 10.69605/ijlbpr_13.8.2024.66 383 ©2024
4. Chang T, Nuppnau M, He Y, Kocher KE, Valley TS, Sjoding MW, Wiens J. Racial differences in laboratory testing as a potential mechanism for bias in AI: A matched cohort analysis in emergency department visits. PLOS Glob Public Health. 2024 Oct 30; 4(10):e0003555. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0003555. PMID: 39475953; PMCID: PMC11524489.
5. Chang T, Nuppnau M, He Y, Kocher KE, Valley TS, Sjoding MW, Wiens J. Racial differences in laboratory testing as a potential mechanism for bias in AI: A matched cohort analysis in emergency department visits. PLOS Glob Public Health. 2024 Oct 30; 4(10):e0003555. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0003555. PMID: 39475953; PMCID: PMC11524489.
6. Alsulimani A, Akhter N, Jameela F, Ashgar RI, Jawed A, Hassani MA, Dar SA. The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Microbial Diagnosis. Microorganisms. 2024 May 23;12 (6):1051. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms12061051. PMID: 38930432; PMCID: PMC11205376.

Deborah Blecker-Shelly is the Laboratory Manager of Microbiology and Molecular Diagnostics at Capital Health in Pennington, New Jersey.