Service provider perspectives on including consumers in the vocational rehabilitation process
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
More efforts to include consumers in the service process are emerging within vocational rehabilitation. In response to this trend, service providers have implemented a variety of innovative approaches, which offer opportunities for persons with disabilities to assume a more active role in goal setting, enacting choices, and self-directing employment plans. However, rehabilitation professionals report that including consumers in partnership or leadership roles is a challenging process. Thus, a better understanding of the issues that hamper or enable consumer participation in vocational rehabilitation practice is needed. Therefore, a qualitative investigation was undertaken to examine service provider experiences in a consumer-driven program where consumer participation was expected. Fourteen service providers shared their views in focus groups on factors integral to consumer involvement. Data from service providers suggest that determinants of consumer participation coalesce around three basic components; consumer competencies for self-management responsibilities, service provider strategies for empowering others, and compatibility of resources at the system, agency and community levels. Implications for enhancing greater involvement of consumers in the vocational rehabilitation process are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it