ReviewFrontiers in public health2026
Mapping community pathways to employment for youth with disabilities-a realist review.
Review in Frontiers in public health, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objectives: Youth with disabilities face significant challenges in accessing employment and transitioning from school-to-work settings. Youth in intersectional contexts face additional barriers. The ecological development theory posits that macro factors such as policies, programs, universal design, and accessible community infrastructure may foster youth participation across sectors and create pathways to employment. This review aimed: (a) to identify the community-based factors related to the employment of youth ages 15-25 with all types of disabilities, and (b) describe the contexts and mechanisms within employment readiness programs that contribute to successful school-to-work employment outcomes. Methods: We conducted a realist review following RAMESES standards on Medline, PsycINFO, ERIC, Policy Commons, Sociological Index, Google Scholar, REHABData and Canadian Research Index. Search terms were related to employment, disabilities, youth, and community factors. Analysis was grounded in the Ecological Systems Theory. The Child Community Health Inclusion Index (CHILD-CHII) Macro-Level factors were used as a framework for data extraction and analysis, including transportation, staff training, community design, awareness initiatives, healthcare access, general programs/services, volunteer/work, education, technology, web-mapping, accessibility policies, and social factors. The Gender Based Analysis Plus (GBA+) Framework was used to explore intersectionality in the programs described. Data was grouped into context, mechanisms, and outcomes to provide an overview of what programs exist, in what circumstances and what type of outcomes are considered successful employment in the existing research. Results: From 13,167 studies identified, 56 articles met the inclusion criteria. The most prominent Mechanisms included: education ( Discussion: Existing youth employment programs focus mainly on the micro environment aspects and individual skills training, job preparedness and individual/employer-targeted strategies. Few mechanisms addressing the meso environment include socials supports and some limited services; however, the macro context of development is rarely addressed, with policies, standards, regulations and systems-levels programs that are not designed to favor employment outcomes for youth with disabilities, particularly those with intersectional realities. Understanding community ecologies, and system-level determinants of employment is critical to the development of inclusive communities and equitable employment opportunities.
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.