Demographic and Salary Trends of the 2020 Biosafety Workforce

Fletcher, Jennifer; Gillum, David; Moritz, Rebecca; Schwartz, Antony

doi:10.1089/apb.20.0066

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Quantitative analysis began by using only respondents who responded yes to being of age 18 years or older, currently employed in a position with biosafety responsibilities, and responses to questions did not include “Not Applicable” or “Unknown.” Univariate analysis using a p value of 0.05 was conducted using chi square tests, t -tests, and analysis of variance to determine whether significant differences existed. Given the significant differences found in prior biosafety articles 15–18 between location, place of employment, and sector, the univariate analysis anticipated finding similar differences.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Experiences During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey of Biosafety Professionals

Gillum

Wyneken

Fletcher³

et al. 2022

Applied Biosafety

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Biosafety professionals were called to action during the COVID-19 pandemic. They were tasked with prescribing measures to keep workers and the community safe while often not having accurate information at their fingertips. Understanding biosafety professionals' experiences may help shape new approaches that could further advance preparedness and resilience goals for future pandemics. This article discusses the overall response efforts of the biosafety community. Objectives: The main objective of this article is to quantitatively and qualitatively interrogate the responses to an email survey sent to individuals with biosafety responsibilities during the COVID-19 pandemic. This article catalogues those responses and the different aspects in how biosafety professionals were involved in the pandemic. The focus of this research was on aggregate data and summarized results. Results: A total of 609 out of 654 respondents fully completed the survey, equating to a 93.1% completion rate. Respondents were individuals with varying levels of COVID-19–related responsibilities participating in emergency preparedness and planning, developing laboratory diagnostic capabilities, reviewing clinical trials, developing safety guidelines, writing return-to-work and quarantine procedures, and participating in press releases and communications. Conclusions: Biosafety professionals played important roles during the COVID-19 pandemic, from developing safety protocols for laboratories to resourcing personal protective equipment during a global shortage. They experienced challenges when balancing their home/work lives. Some biosafety professionals were very involved in clinical trials and vaccination efforts, but most were not. Overall, there were significant differences in how biosafety professionals were involved in pandemic response efforts.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Experiences During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey of Biosafety Professionals

Gillum

Wyneken

Fletcher³

et al. 2022

Applied Biosafety

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Accounting of Wages With the Use of Biometrics to Ensure Cybersecurity of Enterprises

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Modern conditions of growing cyber threats caused by the hybrid conflicts around the world and looming biological threat of the COVID-19 pandemic necessitate the introduction of biometric authentication of employees, leading to the transformation in the methodology and organization of accounting at enterprises. The procedure for accounting and control of time worked and wages of the employees is the first to undergo changes due to the forcibly limited access of employees to the enterprise data and premises, which determines the topicality and aims of this research. The aim of the article is to investigate the prospects for monitoring the working time and movement of employees on the premises (facilities) of the enterprise with the use of biometric technology in order to develop the methodology of automation of the accounting of payments made to employees and to ensure the cybersecurity of economic entities. The prospects of using an automated employee checkpoint system based on biometrics for the purposes of accounting and control are explored. The paper improves the methodology of accounting and control over the working time and wages of employees based on the automated employee authentication system using data on the time spent on premises and performance of job functions. Recommendations are made on ensuring biological and cyber security of enterprises in terms of categorizing the enterprise premises and equipment according to their functions and level of access to information and material flows. The research examines the prospects of accounting for the employee costs, as well as accurate distribution of overhead and other costs based on data of the biometric employee authentication system. It is advised to conduct further research into the peculiarities of methodology and organization of accounting under conditions of distance and isolated job performance by accounting employees, as it raises the requirements to cybersecurity of enterprises. Keywords: accounting, working time, wages (salary), biometrics, employee authentication, automation of accounting and control, cybersecurity, COVID-19. JEL Classification M41, M49 Formulas: 0; fig.: 2; tabl.: 1; bibl.: 18.

show abstract

Bridging biosafety and biosecurity gaps: DURC and ePPP policy insights from U.S. institutions

Gillum,

Tran,

Fletcher

et al. 2024

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OverviewThis study provides empirical data on the knowledge and practices of biosafety and biosecurity professionals and researchers involved in research on enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens (ePPPs) and Dual Use Research of Concern (DURC) within various U.S. sectors. The goal is to improve public health interventions and oversight for DURC and ePPP, contributing valuable insights for policy development. A notable finding was the association between larger biosafety/biosecurity teams and a higher likelihood of conducting high-risk biological research.MethodsA survey of 541 biosafety and biosecurity professionals was conducted between March 8 and 10 April 2024, with results analyzed using SAS at a significance level of 0.05. The study received approval from the Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) at Arizona State University and the University of Nevada, Reno.ResultsGovernment organizations were more likely to conduct DURC compared to other sectors (e.g., Academic, Commercial, Consulting). Public institutions reviewed more experiments outside the scope of the U.S. DURC Policy than private for-profit institutions. Institutions with larger biosafety/biosecurity teams reported greater research activity and more effective non-compliance reporting mechanisms (e.g., anonymous hotlines, reporting forms). Additionally, financial support and the challenges of policy implementation varied significantly across sectors.DiscussionThe findings emphasize the need for appropriate staffing and resource allocation for high-risk biosafety and biosecurity research. A differentiated regulatory approach and equitable distribution of resources are essential for effective oversight. Moreover, robust non-compliance reporting systems are critical to mitigating the risks associated with DURC and ePPP research.

show abstract

Demographic and Salary Trends of the 2020 Biosafety Workforce

Cited by 3 publications

References 18 publications

Experiences During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey of Biosafety Professionals

Experiences During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey of Biosafety Professionals

Accounting of Wages With the Use of Biometrics to Ensure Cybersecurity of Enterprises

Bridging biosafety and biosecurity gaps: DURC and ePPP policy insights from U.S. institutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About