Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31098847›Full record

SynthesisJournal of occupational rehabilitation2019

The Effectiveness of Rehabilitation Interventions on the Employment and Functioning of People with Intellectual Disabilities: A Systematic Review.

Nina Nevala, Irmeli Pehkonen, Antti Teittinen, Hannu T Vesala, Pia Pörtfors, Heidi Anttila

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Challenges and opportunities in adolescent intellectual disability care and rehabilitation.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nina NevalaFinnish Institute of Occupational Health, PO Box 40, 00032, Työterveyslaitos, Finland. nina.nevala@ttl.fi.ORCID 0000-0002-7949-2452
Irmeli PehkonenFinnish Institute of Occupational Health, PO Box 40, 00032, Työterveyslaitos, Finland.
Antti TeittinenThe Finnish Association On Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, Viljatie 4 A, 007004, Helsinki, Finland.
Hannu T VesalaThe Finnish Association On Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, Viljatie 4 A, 007004, Helsinki, Finland.
Pia PörtforsNational Institute for Health and Welfare, PO Box 30, 00271, Helsinki, Finland.
Heidi AnttilaNational Institute for Health and Welfare, PO Box 30, 00271, Helsinki, Finland.
Finnish Association of People with Physical Disabilities · FIFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare · FIFinnish Institute of Occupational Health · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose This systematic review analyzed the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions on the employment and functioning of people with intellectual disabilities (ID), as well as barriers and facilitators of employment. Methods This was a systematic review of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies. The outcomes were employment, transition to the open labor market and functioning. The review included qualitative studies of employment barriers and facilitators. The population comprised people with ID aged 16-68 years. Peer-reviewed articles published in English between January 1990 and February 2019 were obtained from the databases Cinahl, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Eric, Medic, Medline, OTseeker, Pedro, PsycInfo, PubMed, Socindex, and the Web of Science. We also searched Google Scholar and Base. The modified selection instrument (PIOS: participants, intervention, outcome, and study design) used in the selection of the articles depended on the selection criteria. Results Ten quantitative (one randomized controlled, one concurrently controlled, and eight cohort studies), six qualitative studies, one multimethod study, and 21 case studies met the inclusion criteria. The quantitative studies showed that secondary education increases employment among people with ID when it includes work experience and personal support services. Supported employment also increased employment in the open labor market, which sheltered work did not. The barriers to employment were the use of sheltered work, discrimination in vocational experience, the use of class teaching, and deficient work experience while still at school. The facilitators of employment were one's own activity, the support of one's family, job coaching, a well-designed work environment, appreciation of one's work, support form one's employer and work organization, knowledge and experience of employment during secondary education, and for entrepreneurs, the use of a support person. Conclusions The employment of people with ID can be improved through secondary education including proper teaching methods and personal support services, the use of supported work, workplace accommodations and support from one's family and employer. These results can be utilized in the development of rehabilitation, education, and the employment of people with ID, to allow them the opportunity to work in the open labor market and participate in society.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultEmploymentEmployment, SupportedFemaleHumansIntellectual DisabilityMaleMiddle AgedPersons with DisabilitiesQualitative ResearchRehabilitation, VocationalYoung AdultBarriersDevelopmental DisabilityEmploymentFacilitatorsIntellectual DisabilityLearning DisabilityRehabilitationSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID31098847
PMCPMC6838041
OpenAlexW2946481069

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.