Disclosure and workplace accommodations for people with autism: a systematic review
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
PURPOSE: The objective of this systematic review was to describe the prevalence and processes of disability disclosure for persons with autism spectrum disorder. METHODS: Systematic searches of seven international databases revealed 26 studies meeting our inclusion criteria. We analyzed these studies with respect to participant demographics, methodology, results and quality of the evidence. RESULTS: Among the 26 studies, 7006 participants (aged 13-75, mean 28.1 years) were represented across seven countries. Our findings showed that rates of disclosure and receiving workplace accommodations varied considerably. Benefits of disclosing in the workplace included greater acceptance and inclusion, receiving accommodations, and increasing awareness about autism. Limitations of disclosing to employers involved experiencing stigma and discrimination. Factors affecting decisions to disclose included age at diagnosis, social demands of the job, and workplace policies. Types of accommodations that were received or desired included adjustments to the job interview process, schedules (i.e., flexibility, working from home), job content or working conditions, environment (i.e., lighting, quiet space); support with communication and social skills; and disability awareness training for their workplace colleagues. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight that disclosing a condition of autism in the workplace and requesting accommodations is complex. More research is needed to explore processes of disclosing and accommodation and how these processes vary by autism sub-type, gender, and industry type.Implications for rehabilitationClinicians and vocational Counselors should support people with autism to advocate for their needs in the workplace, including the potential benefits of disclosing their conditions so they can access accommodations that allow them to keep healthy and productive in workplace.Clinicians should recognize that people with autism spectrum disorder may have different workplace accommodation needs than those with other types of disabilities, in particular support with social and communication skills.Clinicians should aid people with autism to access resources and supports that are available to them to access 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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