MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3087168114 · doi:10.1002/wps.20784

An update on Individual Placement and Support

2020· article· en· W3087168114 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueWorld Psychiatry · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueEmployment and Welfare Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSupported employmentMental healthMental illnessMedicineQuality (philosophy)Public relationsPsychologyWork (physics)NursingMedical educationPsychiatry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Disability experts and public officials in countries around the world now acknowledge that people with chronic health conditions and disabilities, including serious mental illnesses, have a right to participate fully in community life, including regular employment. Employment is not only a determinant of health and well-being, including mental health1, but also an antidote to social exclusion2. Individual Placement and Support (IPS) has become the stan-dard of supported employment for people with serious mental illness, such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. It incorporates eight core principles that have been well researched with a validated fidelity scale used worldwide for quality improvement purposes3. These principles are: a) focus on the goal of competitive employment (agencies providing IPS are committed to regular jobs in the community as an attainable goal for clients seeking employment); b) zero exclusion (every client who wants to work is eligible for services regardless of “readiness”, work experience, symptoms, or any other issue); c) attention to clients' preferences (services align with clients' choices, rather than practitioners' expertise or judgments; IPS specialists help clients find jobs that fit their preferences and skills); d) rapid job search (IPS programs help a client look for jobs soon after he/she expresses interest in working, rather than providing lengthy pre-employment assessment, training and counseling); e) targeted job development (based on clients' interests, IPS specialists build relationships with employers through repeated contact, learning about the business needs of employers, and introducing employers to qualified job seekers); f) integration of employment services with mental health treatment (IPS programs closely integrate with mental health treatment teams); g) personalized benefits counseling (IPS specialists help clients obtain personalized, understandable and accurate information about how working may impact their disability insurance and other government entitlements); h) individualized long-term support (follow-along supports, tailored for the individual, continue for as long as the client wants and needs them to keep a job or advance career opportunities). Evidence for the effectiveness of IPS continues to grow, starting with early studies in the US in the 1990s and 2000s and extending to replication studies throughout Europe, Canada, Australia, Hong Kong and Japan. IPS is the most extensively and rigorously researched of all employment models and the only evidence-based employment model for people with serious mental illness. In 28 randomized controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of IPS for people with serious mental illness, all but one in mainland China found competitive employment outcomes significantly favoring IPS. Across the 28 studies (N=6,468), 55% of IPS participants achieved competitive employment, compared to 25% of control participants receiving other vocational services (https://ipsworks.org/index.php/evidence-for-ips/). Over the last decade, a number of systematic reviews and -meta-analyses have confirmed this basic finding4, 5. One meta-analysis reported moderate to large effects favoring IPS for a range of other employment outcomes5. Another meta-analysis found that, compared to control participants, IPS participants gained employment faster, maintained employment four times longer during follow-up, earned three times the amount from employment, and were three times as likely to work 20 hours or more per week (https://ipsworks.org/index.php/evidence-for-ips/). Long-term studies show that half of all clients enrolled in IPS become steady workers, maintaining employment for 10 years or longer. A recent follow-up study of a large, multisite trial found that significantly higher earnings for IPS clients compared to controls persisted over a five-year period after the two-year intervention6. Cost-effectiveness analyses of randomized controlled trials of IPS have generally found the aggregated costs of vocational and mental health services to be no higher, and sometimes significantly lower, for IPS than for standard services2. IPS has expanded steadily, spreading to new clinical populations and more mental health settings in the US and worldwide. Recent randomized controlled trials of IPS include six trials for people with common mental disorders, two for people with substance use disorders, and one for veterans with spinal cord injuries. Eight of these nine studies showed employment outcomes significantly favoring IPS7. Several large-scale IPS trials in other populations are in progress, including three for people with substance use disorders: Project BEES in the US, the IPS-AD study in the UK, and a similar study in Norway. Several small randomized controlled trials of IPS for people with criminal justice involvement have been completed, with a large-scale US trial, the Next Gen study, to start soon. Following pilot work, large IPS trials are planned or underway for people with autism spectrum disorder, borderline personality disorder, and chronic pain. IPS also helps young adults negotiate the pathway to meaningful adult roles in employment and education, e.g., as a stan-dard component of early intervention programs for clients with a first episode of psychosis. Other subgroups of the young adult population also appear to benefit from IPS (https://ipsworks.org/index.php/evidence-for-ips/). The effectiveness of IPS has been well established since at least the turn of the century. The key question for IPS, as for other evidence-based psychosocial practices, is how to close the gap between the known population of those who want and need these evidence-based services and those who have access. In the US, approximately 60% of people with serious mental illness want to work, but less than 2% have access to IPS. The primary barriers have been inadequate funding and the lack of methodology for large-scale expansion2. While adequate financing remains elusive worldwide, some governments have made national commitments to fund IPS access8. The second ingredient is a mechanism to facilitate adoption, high-fidelity implementation, growth and sustainment of IPS. Since 2002, our group has led an international learning community that coordinates education, training, technical assistance, fidelity and outcome monitoring, and regular communications through newsletters, bimonthly calls, and an annual meeting9. The learning community has continuously reported employment rates for participating IPS programs in the US every three months for 18 years. During this time, the overall quarterly employment rate has not dipped below 40%, even during the Great Recession. The learning community helps programs sustain IPS services over time: in one prospective study, 96% of 129 IPS programs were sustained over two years. Participation has expanded steadily, with a mean annual growth rate of 26% in the number of IPS programs in the US. The learning community helps to maintain over 450 IPS programs, including 366 in the US and 100 outside the US, most at high fidelity with good employment outcomes. Rapid expansion of IPS across the world8 includes at least 19 high-income countries outside the US over the past 20 years (Australia, Belgium, Canada, China, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the UK). The flexibility and adaptability of the IPS model facilitate successful adoption with high fidelity and good employment outcomes in countries with diverse sociocultural conditions, labor laws, welfare systems, and economic conditions4. The steady growth of programs, sustainment of services, and expansion to new populations makes IPS a unique evidence-based practice. We attribute success to client interest, continuous research-based improvements, and a vibrant learning community.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,326
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,058
Tête enseignante GPT0,398
Écart entre enseignants0,340 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle