Promoting Job Quality and Career Advancement Among Persons with Disabilities During Critical Career Transitions: A Scoping Review of Published Evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Persons with disabilities can face challenges in obtaining high quality jobs during critical work transitions that are linked to worker well-being and opportunities for sustainable career growth. There is a need to identify and describe employment interventions that support persons living with disabilities in obtaining high quality jobs and advancing in their careers during critical work transitions. METHODS: A scoping review of published intervention research was conducted. Two parallel searches focusing on job quality and career advancement were carried out and merged. Articles were screened at the title and abstract level and at full text level by two reviewers. A narrative synthesis was undertaken to examine the impact of relevant interventions on job quality and career advancement during critical work transitions. RESULTS: Searches yielded 5858 studies (2543 job quality studies; 3315 career advancement studies). Fifteen studies were included from the job quality search and one study was included from the career advancement search. Studies originated from 3 different countries, the most prevalent being the United States of America (n = 14). Eight studies focussed on vocational rehabilitation interventions, six focused on interventions at post-secondary educational settings, one study focused on individualized placement services and two focussed on customised employment. The included studies offered limited measurements of job quality outcomes and career advancement. Vocational rehabilitation interventions were promising for enhancing job quality at the early career phase, particularly when delivered within educational institutions. CONCLUSION: Overall, evidence is lacking on the interventions that promote job quality and career advancement at different phases of the working life course. Additional research is needed to develop applied insights that enhance current programs, ensuring persons with disabilities can navigate career transitions and to promote job quality and career advancement.
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 | 0.020 | 0.089 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.019 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".