Exploring factors shaping employment outcomes of people with disabilities through the PEOP model: a scoping review.
Huiling Hu, Peter H F Ng, Karen P Y Liu and 1 others
PMID 42131470WHAT IT FOUND
Employment for people with disabilities depends on a mix of personal skills, workplace support, and job design.
Vocational programs, accommodations, and assistive tech help, but stigma, transport gaps, and heavy workloads remain major barriers.
Key findings
01Person factors like motivation and self-advocacy skills facilitate employment, while cognitive deficits and reluctance to disclose needs hinder it.
02Environmental support, including workplace accommodations, employer attitudes, and assistive technology, significantly improves job acquisition and retention.
03Vocational rehabilitation interventions, such as supported employment and job coaching, are effective, but heavy workloads and complex tasks undermine sustainability.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The included studies varied widely in design and population, making direct comparison difficult. Only two studies were randomized controlled trials; most were observational or qualitative. Publication bias may have led to an overrepresentation of studies reporting positive findings. The review included limited data from low- and middle-income countries, restricting generalizability to those contexts.
Declared interests
No specific funding sources or conflicts of interest were declared in the provided text.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that any single intervention guarantees employment success. The review shows that outcomes depend on the interaction of person, environment, and occupation factors; a strong individual skill set may still fail if workplace accommodations or employer attitudes are unsupportive.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →