Successful research outcomes require selection and implementation of the appropriate research design. A realistic sampling plan appropriate for the design is essential. Qualitative or quantitative methodology may be utilized, depending on the research question and goals. Quantitative research may be experimental where there is an intervention, or nonexperimental, if no intervention is included in the design. Causation can only be established with experimental research. Popular types of nonexperimental research include descriptive and survey research. Research findings may be disseminated via presentations, posters, and publications, such as abstracts and manuscripts.

The focus on scholarly productivity as an outcome measure for performance evaluations of personnel and/or units and benchmarking purposes is increasing in both the academic and clinical settings. This article presents avenues for identifying achievable research projects in both the academic and clinical settings. Factors for consideration when selecting a project include its significance or impact on the profession, feasibility for implementing the project, and ethical issues related to human subjects protection. A review of the literature is essential for identifying gaps in knowledge and for constructing the hypothesis or research question. Decisions concerning IRB submission, budget allocation, and collection of data must also be considered before implementation of the research design.

Rapid advancements in diagnostic technologies coupled with growth in testing options and choices mandate the development of evidence-based testing algorithms linked to the care paths of the major chronic diseases and health challenges encountered most frequently. As care paths are evaluated, patient/consumers become partners in healthcare delivery. Clinical laboratory scientists find themselves firmly embedded in both quality improvement and clinical research with an urgent need to translate clinical laboratory information into knowledge required by practitioners and patient/consumers alike. To implement this patient-centered care approach in clinical laboratory science, practitioners must understand their roles in (1) protecting patient/consumer autonomy in the healthcare informed consent process and (2) assuring patient/consumer privacy and confidentiality while blending quality improvement study findings with protected health information. A literature review, describing the current ethical environment, supports a consultative role for clinical laboratory scientists in the clinical decision-making process and suggests guidance for policy and practice regarding the principle of autonomy and its associated operational characteristics: informed consent and privacy.

A review of professional literature was conducted to examine the history of the education of medical laboratory practitioners. This comprehensive review included historical educational milestones from World War II to present day. During this time period the standard of two years of college required for matriculation into a medical technology program increased to four years. Critical thinking skills promoted in the educational model and applied in practice expanded from an analytic and psychomotor orientation to include those requiring extensive situational interpretation and negotiation. By the end of the twentieth century, the clinical laboratory had experienced significant scientific and technologic transformations necessitating greatly expanded roles for the medical laboratory practitioner. Though the educational requirements and education model have changed minimally since the 1970's, the knowledge and skills required for the next generation of medical laboratory practitioners continue to escalate. The second decade of the 21st century portends a transformation in medical laboratory practitioner education commensurate with the rapid advancement of science, technology, communications, and the precepts of evidence-based practice.

A review of professional literature was conducted to examine the history of the education of medical laboratory practitioners. This comprehensive review included historical educational milestones from the birth of medical technology to the advent of World War II. During this time period standards were developed by clinical pathologists for laboratory personnel and training programs. In addition, a formal educational model began to form and by the 1940's two years of college was required for matriculation into a medical technology program. Intertwined within the educational milestones are imprints of the evolution of critical thinking requirements and skills within the profession. For the first laboratory practitioners, critical thinking was not developed, discussed, or encouraged as duties were primarily repetitive promoting psychomotor skills.

Good communication and critical thinking are essential skills for all successful professionals, including Clinical Laboratory Science/Medical Laboratory Science (CLS/MLS) practitioners. Professional programs can incorporate writing assignments into their curricula to improve student written communication and critical thinking skills. Clearly defined, scenario-focused writing assignments provide student practice in clearly articulating responses to proposed problems or situations, researching and utilizing informational resources, and applying and synthesizing relevant information. Assessment rubrics, structured feedback, and revision writing methodologies help guide students through the writing process. This article describes how a CLS Program in a public academic medical center, located in the central United States (US) serving five centrally-located US states has incorporated writing intensive assignments into an existing 11-month academic year using formal, informal and reflective writing to improve student written communication and critical thinking skills. Faculty members and employers of graduates assert that incorporating writing intensive requirements have better prepared students for their professional role to effectively communicate and think critically.

An entire series could be dedicated to the topic of ethics in personalized medicine. Due to the advancements in NGS and genetic testing, personalized medicine is no longer something that will occur in the future, the reality is upon us now. Sequencing an individual's genome can have a substantial impact on the patient's treatment and overall quality of life. However, this can open "Pandora's box" especially if an individual does not want to know the information obtained. In addition, will insurance companies require genetic testing in order to pay for a targeted treatment? If the patient refuses to have the genetic testing, will they have to pay for their treatment out of pocket? In the human interest story presented, the researcher and his team discovered over activity of the FTL3 protein through RNA sequencing which resulted in rapid proliferation of his leukemic cells. He identified a drug marketed for advanced kidney cancer which was a FTL3 inhibitor. However, his insurance company refused to pay for the drug because it was not a known treatment for his condition of ALL. He incurred numerous out of pocket expenses in order to go into remission. Was it unethical for the insurance company to not pay for a treatment that ultimately worked but was not marketed or FDA cleared for his type of leukemia? There are so many questions and concerns when personalized medicine is implemented. Only time will tell the effects next generation sequencing and its role in personalized medicine will have in the future.

Next generation sequencing platforms and the applications that are offered have revolutionized the way a physician will treat and monitor a patient based on the individual's own genetic make-up. Whether whole genome sequencing, exome sequencing, or targeted sequencing is performed, the information generated must be analyzed, interpreted, and reported correctly. Since the various platforms and application panels are not FDA cleared (with the exception of the Illumina MiSeqDx Cystic Fibrosis Clinical Sequencing Assay and the Illumina MiSeqDx Cystic Fibrosis 139-Variant Assay) clinical laboratorians are faced with the challenge of standardizing and validating the various panels and platforms for appropriate quality management. Therefore, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics published guidelines for ordering, test development, validation and reporting of genetic information. These guidelines should be followed by all laboratorians performing NGS to ensure quality results and to provide proper interpretation of all genomic variants identified.

The advent of DNA sequencing technologies and the various applications that can be performed will have a dramatic effect on medicine and healthcare in the near future. There are several DNA sequencing platforms available on the market for research and clinical use. Based on the medical laboratory scientist or researcher's needs and taking into consideration laboratory space and budget, one can chose which platform will be beneficial to their institution and their patient population. Although some of the instrument costs seem high, diagnosing a patient quickly and accurately will save hospitals money with fewer hospital stays and targeted treatment based on an individual's genetic make-up. By determining the type of disease an individual has, based on the mutations present or having the ability to prescribe the appropriate antimicrobials based on the knowledge of the organism's resistance patterns, the clinician will be better able to treat and diagnose a patient which ultimately will improve patient outcomes and prognosis.

A survey of members of the American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science (ASCLS) in 2012 examined laboratory administrators' views on retention incentives and older Clinical Laboratory Professionals (CLP). Results indicated that retention strategies currently in place are not concordant with the ones CLP think are important. Further, with the exception of ergonomic equipment, administrators reported low feasibility for the workplace changes favored by practitioners. While all administrators attributed positive traits to older CLP, older administrators held more favorable views. Administrators perceived older CLP as productive, having a high level of technical skills and loyal. The combination of technical competence and work ethic make retention of older CLP attractive to laboratory administrators and advantageous for combatting workforce shortages. This study highlights the discordance between the retention incentives valued by CLP and those viewed as feasible by administrators. Findings should be used by administrators to refine incentive packages that better reflect the desires of CLP.

A survey of members of the American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science (ASCLS) was taken in May, 2012 to study workplace incentives and personal factors that could encourage clinical laboratory professionals (CLP) to continue working past retirement eligibility. Benefits, compensation, and opportunity for part-time work were key retention incentives identified by CLP in all age and job function groups. Career stage was shown to play a significant role in how CLP rated the importance of several retirement incentives, suggesting that age differences exist in workplace factors and personal motivators for continuing to work. There are also differences among practitioners, administrators, and educators in how they view incentives for working past retirement eligibility. Results of the study may help laboratory administrators advocate for workplace changes important to retaining staff of varying age and job function.

A survey to assess the retirement plans of clinical laboratory professionals (CLP) and the factors that would influence those plans was distributed to members of the American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science (ASCLS) in May, 2012. A majority of respondents (65%) between 50-62 years indicated that there was a greater than 50% chance they would be working after age 62. Only 15.8% of the respondents thought that there was a greater than 50% chance that they would be working full time after they retired from their current job. The retirement option selected most often by respondents was part time work. This was true for respondents in all age groups and job functions. The greatest personal influence on retirement plans was concern about health issues. The results indicate that, if employers can provide part time options, older workers may stay in the workforce as long as they are healthy.