MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318828860 · doi:10.1080/09638288.2023.2173315

More than just double discrimination: a scoping review of the experiences and impact of ableism and racism in employment

2023· review· en· W4318828860 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Education and Employment
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbleismRacismIntersectionalitySociologyInclusion (mineral)Social psychologyGender studiesPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Research has shed light on the employment barriers faced by individuals with disabilities, and by racialized people. The challenges faced by people belonging to both marginalized groups are less well-understood. The purpose of this scoping review was to examine existing research on labour market and workplace experiences of racialized people with disabilities, and to identify how ableism and racism intersect to shape employment experiences and outcomes. METHODS: Seven international databases were searched, covering the period from 2000 to April 2022. Four reviewers independently conducted the screening, and data extraction and analysis were performed on 44 articles that met our inclusion criteria. RESULTS: The findings highlighted rates of workplace ableism and racism (including discrimination allegations and perceived discrimination); types and forms of experiences arising from the intersection of ableism and racism (including unique individual stereotyping and systemic and institutional discrimination); and the role of other demographic variables. The intersection of ableism and racism impacted labour market outcomes, well-being in the workplace, and career/professional advancement. CONCLUSIONS: Our review highlights the need for greater in-depth research focusing explicitly on the intersection of ableism and racism (and of other forms of discrimination), to better understand and address the barriers that racialized people with disabilities face in employment.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThe experiences of racialized people with disabilities have been under explored, and clinicians and rehabilitation specialists should consider incorporating intersectionality into their practices to better understand and serve these populations.Ableism and racism do not operate in isolation, and clinicians and other professionals need to be aware that racialized people with disabilities may face unique challenges and barriers as a result.Service providers should aim to address gaps and inequities in services faced by racialized people with disabilities which may prevent them from finding and/or maintaining meaningful employment.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.281
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.357 · 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