ArticleBMJ open2022
Inclusion of young people with disabilities in the future of work: forecasting workplace, labour market and community-based strategies through an online and accessible Delphi survey protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. 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.
- Strategies for Supporting Disability-Inclusive Employment in the Future of Work.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Promoting Job Quality and Career Advancement Among Persons with Disabilities During Critical Career Transitions: A Scoping Review of Published Evidence.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2025Review
- The future of work in shaping the employment inclusion of young adults with disabilities: a qualitative study.Equality, diversity and inclusion : an international journal · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe future of work is expected to transform the nature of work, create unique employment barriers for young people living with disabilities and disrupt pathways to better health. We present a Delphi survey protocol through which we aim to obtain future-oriented strategies that can improve the accessibility and inclusion of young people with disabilities in the future of work. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Delphi survey will be conducted primarily online, over two rounds and in a format that is accessible to people living with disabilities. A diverse sample of subject matter experts (eg, policy makers, employment service providers, labour market experts) and participants with lived experience of a disability will be recruited using a purposive sampling strategy. All participants will be asked to complete both rounds of the Delphi survey. In the first round, open-ended questions will be asked about workplace, community-based or policy supports that can foster the inclusion of young people with disabilities in the labour market and that can also address specific future of work trends which span sociopolitical, economic, environmental and technological domains. In the second round of the survey, we will aim to build consensus; participants will be provided with a summary of specific strategies that correspond to the different future of work trends emerging from round one and will be asked to rank-order strategies according to their importance. Following the completion of the second round, consensus-based and future-focused recommendations will be generated that can support young people with disabilities in the world of work over the coming decades. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol has been cleared by the University of Toronto's research ethics board (#40727). The study will identify future-focused support strategies that will be shared with people living with disabilities, policy makers and disability employment service providers through an integrated knowledge transfer and exchange approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.