A literature review on work transitioning of youth with disabilities into competitive employment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The marginalisation of youth with disabilities from employment opportunities is evident from literature in as far as they form part of the larger groups 'people with disabilities' and 'youth'. A focused view of programmes that assist youth with disabilities into employment has not been presented, despite the worldwide crisis of youth unemployment. AIM: This review aimed to identify evidence on work transition programmes that are effective in assisting people with disabilities into open labour market (competitive) employment, as well as to highlight gaps in knowledge to inform future research on this topic. METHODS: Literature and policy on programmes that support such transitions were considered, firstly from a global perspective and then with a view from developing countries. The SALSA (Search, Appraisal, Synthesis and Analysis) framework was used to source and analyse information from a diverse set of documents. Various online databases were searched for research papers published between 1990 and 2016, and websites were searched for reports pertaining to this topic. RESULTS: Ninety-nine documents were selected to inform the review, out of an identified 259 scientific journal articles, policy documents, acts, organisational reports and book chapters. CONCLUSION: A synthesis of findings was presented in a narrative that reflects the themes of youth with disabilities and employment in the world, work transition endeavours in the developing world and a specific focus on this group in South Africa. The review revealed a gap in knowledge and evidence pertaining to youth with disabilities and employment, highlighting these as research foci, and emphasising the need for youth-focused research that generates knowledge about disability and transitions into the labour force.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".