SynthesisJournal of occupational rehabilitation2017
Supported Decision-Making: Implications from Positive Psychology for Assessment and Intervention in Rehabilitation and Employment.
Synthesis in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Positive Psychology Insights on the Effects of Spirituality on Shared Decision-Making in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure: The Chain-Mediated Effects of Benefit-Finding and Decision Self-Efficacy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A Decision Aid to Support Vocational Rehabilitation Professionals Offering Tailored Care to Benefit Recipients with a Long-Term Work Disability: A Feasibility Study.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2024Article
- On the Importance of the Americans with Disabilities Act at 30.Journal of disability policy studies · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose This article reviews existing literature on positive psychology, supported decision-making (SDM), employment, and disability. It examines interventions and assessments that have been empirically evaluated for the enhancement of decision-making and overall well-being of people with disabilities. Additionally, conceptual themes present in the literature were explored. Methods A systematic review was conducted across two databases (ERIC and PsychINFO) using various combination of keywords of 'disabilit*', work rehabilitation and employment terms, positive psychology terms, and SDM components. Seven database searches were conducted with diverse combinations of keywords, which identified 1425 results in total to be screened for relevance using their titles and abstracts. Database search was supplemented with hand searches of oft-cited journals, ancestral search, and supplemental search from grey literature. Results Only four studies were identified in the literature targeting SDM and positive psychology related constructs in the employment and job development context. Results across the studies indicated small to moderate impacts of the assessment and interventions on decision-making and engagement outcomes. Conceptually there are thematic areas of potential overlap, although they are limited in the explicit integration of theory in supported decision-making, positive psychology, disability, and employment. Conclusion Results suggest a need for additional scholarship in this area that focuses on theory development and integration as well as empirical work. Such work should examine the potential utility of considering positive psychological interventions when planning for SDM in the context of career development activities to enhance positive outcomes related to decision-making, self-determination, and other positive psychological constructs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29119422What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.