Barriers and Facilitators of Older Workers’ Abilities to Obtain and Maintain Employment: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Throughout adulthood, the ability to access employment is vital for financial well-being, social inclusion and civic participation. This scoping review explores the factors that facilitate or challenge the abilities of workers age 50 and older to obtain and maintain paid employment. A total of 244 academic and grey literature articles were included in this scoping review. To frame the data extraction and analysis of included literature, we drew on Human Ecology Theory, a multidisciplinary theory that posits that individuals affect and are affected by the contexts they inhabit. Four key contexts were identified that impact older workers' employability (and the relevant codes that comprise each context): individual context (health, income and wealth accumulation, education and skills, employment history, lifestyle preferences and personal characteristics); family context (obligations with intimate partners, obligations to dependent children and caregiving obligations); workplace context (organizational characteristics, workplace policies, job characteristics and workplace relationships) and sociopolitical context (ageism, government labour and pension policies and macroeconomic conditions). We conclude that the employability of older workers is not attributable to a single factor within any of these contexts. Rather, older workers' abilities to maintain their labour force participation are fluid, situational and temporal, including aspects that arise across a person's life course as forms of cumulative advantage or disadvantage. Policies to support older workers' labour force participation require governments and employers to recognize how the dynamic lived experiences and relationships of individuals-within families, workplaces and society-shape their employability in later life.
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 | 0.010 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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".