Employment-Low-Favorable impacts

Recently Added

CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.

Search
for studies on
this topic using
keywords
and filters

Displaying 11 - 20 of 170

Effect of supported employment on vocational rehabilitation outcomes of transition-age youth with intellectual and developmental disabilities: A case control study (Wehman et. al, 2014)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of supported employment on employment outcomes for youth with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The study used a nonexperimental design…
Identifying factors that promote successful vocational rehabilitation case closure: Comparison of individual characteristics, VR experiences and state economic conditions (Wang & Ethridge, 2022)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) services on employment outcomes. The study used a nonexperimental design to determine whether the number of VR…
Models of brain injury vocational rehabilitation: The evidence for resource facilitation from efficacy to effectiveness (Trexler & Parrott, 2018)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Rehabilitation Hospital of Indiana Resource Facilitation (RHI RF) program on employment outcomes. The authors used a nonexperimental design…
Behavioral activation therapy for return to work in medication-responsive chronic depression with persistent psychosocial dysfunction. (Hellerstein et. al, 2015)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Behavioral Activation therapy with a goal of returning to work (BA-W) on employment and health outcomes. The study used an interrupted time…
Youth with disabilities: Are vocational rehabilitation services improving employment outcomes? (Awsumb et. al, 2020)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) services on employment outcomes. The study uses a nonexperimental design to compare employment outcomes of youth…
Implementing coordinated specialty care for early psychosis: The RAISE Connection Program (Dixon et al., 2015)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Recovery After an Initial Schizophrenia Episode (RAISE) Connection Program on employment, education, and health outcomes. The study…
Stages of change scale to measure work readiness of transition-age youth with disabilities: A promising approach (Schlegelmilch et. al, 2021)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Wisconsin PROMISE program on readiness for employment among youth with disabilities. The study used an interrupted time series design to…
Factors contributing to successful employment outcomes for individuals who are hard-of-hearing (Cuevas et. al, 2021)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the State-Federal Vocational Rehabilitation (SFVR) Program on successful employment for individuals who are hard-of-hearing. The study used…
New insights into the back on track model's effects on opportunity youth outcomes: Opportunity works final evaluation report (Anderson et. al, 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Back on Track framework on earning a high school credential and being disconnected from both work and school (that is, neither working nor…
New insights into the back on track model's effects on opportunity youth outcomes: Opportunity works final evaluation report (Anderson et. al, 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Back on Track framework on obtaining a high school credential and being disconnected from both work and school. The authors investigated similar…

CLEAR Icon Key

Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.

High Causal Evidence

Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence

Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence

Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis

Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis

Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis

Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable

Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.