ArticleNew RE:view (Alexandria, Va.)2024
Systematic Adaptation of the JOBS Program for Use with Adults with Visual Impairments.
Article in New RE:view (Alexandria, Va.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: The purpose of this study was to use a systematic process to adapt the JOBS program, an evidence-based job search intervention, for use with unemployed adults with visual impairments and implementation via videoconferencing. Method: The Planned Adaptation approach, an established framework for adapting evidence-based practices, guided the adaptations. The four-step Planned Adaptation process comprised examining the program's theory of change, identifying population differences, adapting the program content, and adapting the evaluation strategy. Results: The original JOBS program has five key components, two critical causal mechanisms, and several potential moderators. Differences between the original and new target populations include needs, experiences, and employment barriers. Adaptations included activity changes, new processes to enhance outcomes, and changes to the implementation procedures. The evaluation plan for the adapted program includes a pilot study to test the updated activities, processes, and procedures, followed by an efficacy study to assess outcomes. Discussion: The JOBS program was a strong candidate for systematic adaptation due to its theoretical foundation, thorough documentation, and established active ingredients. Stakeholder input increased the relevance and feasibility of the adaptations. Future research is needed to evaluate the adapted program and its outcomes. Application for Practitioners: After completion of the evaluation plan, the new JOBS adaptation will be available for practitioners to use with adults with visual impairments. Practitioners may find the Planned Adaptation approach useful for adapting other programs to better meet the needs of the population they serve.
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.