Towards identifying gaps in employment integration of people living with vision impairment: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The high rate of unemployment among individuals with vision impairment remains a pressing issue, even with the implementation of disability laws and coordinated effort to foster inclusive workplace. Employment integration challenges persist for people with vision impairment due to inaccessible job markets and workplaces. Objective: To create new knowledge from previous studies related to employment among people with vision impairment and to understand what has been explored and identify the gaps in employment integration. Method: A comprehensive search of six databases was conducted utilizing both index terms and keywords. The title and abstract of identified studies were screened, followed by a full-text screening using pre-set criteria. Only available peer-reviewed studies with a focus on employment and vision impairment were included, irrespective of location and publication year. Result: Of 2264 studies screened, only 43 studies were eligible for review and data extraction. Using thematic analysis, 8 key themes emerged: social support, disability rights and service systems, transition strategies and challenges, career, employment integration, employment environment, adaptive potential, and employment sustainability. These studies considered the perspectives of people living with vision impairment, rehabilitation practice, and employers. Identified gaps include transition strategies, workplace participation, the perception of colleagues, and work evolution. Conclusion: The primary focus of studies was on the individual factors that impact workplace integration; work environment impact was not explored in depth. The need to examine the readiness of the work environment is also importance because environmental factors can be modified according to the functional needs of people with vision impairment.
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 | 0.032 | 0.099 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.030 | 0.022 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".