MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790195693 · doi:10.1080/09638288.2018.1451926

Disability disclosure and workplace accommodations among youth with disabilities

2018· article· en· W2790195693 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Education and Employment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsThematic analysisPsychologyWorkforceReasonable accommodationAccommodationInclusion (mineral)Stigma (botany)Qualitative researchMedical educationNursingSocial psychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Many youths with disabilities find it challenging to disclose their medical condition and request workplace accommodations. Our objective was to explore when and how young people with disabilities disclose their condition and request workplace accommodations.Methods: We conducted 17 in-depth interviews (11 females, six males) with youth with disabilities aged 15–34 (mean age 26). We analyzed our data using an interpretive, qualitative, and thematic approach.Results: Our results showed the timing of when youth disclosed their disability to their employer depended on disability type and severity, comfort level, type of job, and industry. Youth’s strategies and reasons for disclosure included advocating for their needs, being knowledgeable about workplace rights, and accommodation solutions. Facilitators for disclosure included job preparation, self-confidence, and self-advocacy skills, and having an inclusive work environment. Challenges to disability disclosure included the fear of stigma and discrimination, lack of employer’s knowledge about disability and accommodations, negative past experiences of disclosing, and not disclosing on your own terms.Conclusions: Our findings highlight that youth encounter several challenges and barriers to disclosing their condition and requesting workplace accommodations. The timing and process for disclosing is complex and further work is needed to help support youth with disclosing their condition.Implications for rehabilitationClinicians, educators, and employers should emphasize the importance of mentoring and leadership programs to give youth the confidence and self-advocacy skills needed to disclose and ask for accommodations in the workplace.Clinicians should advocate for the inclusion of youth with disabilities in the workforce and educate employers on the importance of doing so.Youth with disabilities need more opportunities for employment training and particularly how to disclose their disability and request workplace accommodations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.028
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it