Precarious employment and mental health among young Australians with disability: a mixed-methods study during the COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is increasing recognition of the challenges young people face in navigating precarious labour markets, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the relationship between precarious employment and mental health remains underexplored, especially for young people with disability who face systemic labour market barriers. This study uses data from the Australian Youth Employment Study to: (1) examine patterns of precarious employment among young people with and without disability; (2) compare precarious employment and mental health outcomes across these groups; and (3) explore the lived experiences of young people with disability regarding precarious employment and mental health during the pandemic. Using a mixed-methods design, the study includes survey data from 112 participants (aged 17–27, mean = 21.9, 41.5% with disability) and interviews with 24 young people with psychosocial and/or intellectual disability. Results indicate that young people with disability were more likely to experience underemployment (35% versus 24% of non-disabled peers) and poorer mental health, regardless of work conditions. Interview findings reveal barriers to stable employment, exacerbated by the pandemic, leading to job instability and heightened mental health concerns. This study highlights the need for inclusive workplace practices, strengthened disability employment services, and equitable access to mental health and employment support programmes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".