MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416011818 · doi:10.1007/s10926-025-10339-7

Strategies for Supporting Disability-Inclusive Employment in the Future of Work

2025· article· en· W4416011818 on OpenAlexafffund
Sabrina Hossain, Kay Nasir, Alecia Carolli, Monique A. M. Gignac, Dwayne Van Eerd, Arif Jetha

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational Rehabilitation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Education and Employment
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoInstitute for Work & Health
FundersAccessibility Standards CanadaArthritis Society
KeywordsWork (physics)Inclusion (mineral)Health psychologySupported employmentService providerRehabilitationService (business)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The world of work is rapidly changing and is expected to create new challenges and opportunities for young adults living with disabilities. This study aimed to identify strategies that might enhance inclusion for young people with disabilities as they navigate the future of work. METHODS: Two survey rounds informed by a Delphi approach were completed by 125 participants that included subject matter experts and individuals with lived expertise of a disability. In the first survey, participants were asked about dimensions of the future of work that could affect the employment of young adults living with disabilities and related workplace, community-based, and policy supports that might enhance disability employment inclusion. In the second survey, participants reviewed strategies suggested to promote inclusion in the future of work and ranked them based on their potential impact in supporting the employment of young adults living with disabilities. RESULTS: Six specific challenge areas in the future of work for young adults with disabilities were identified and included the impact of digital technologies, artificial intelligence (AI) in human resource decision-making, digital globalization, populism and attitudes toward workplace inclusivity, climate change, and external shocks accelerating the pace of change. Top-ranked strategies spanned workplace, social policy, and educational settings and involved delivering lifelong skill-building initiatives, enforcing minimum accessibility standards, enhancing employer disability confidence, and protecting employment rights internationally. CONCLUSION: Strategies identified in this study provide solutions to enhance employment inclusion in the future of work. Findings may be utilized by policymakers, employers, and employment service providers as considerations in the design of employment policies and programs for young adults with disabilities that may sustain employment in a shifting work landscape.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0020.017
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.401 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational RehabilitationSame topicDisability Education and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207