A Systematic Review of the Role of Gender in Securing and Maintaining Employment Among Youth and Young Adults with Disabilities
- 463 Downloads
Purpose There is a critical need for gender-specific vocational supports for young adults with disabilities as they transition to employment. We conducted a systematic review to explore the role of gender in securing and maintaining employment. Methods Systematic searches of seven databases identified 48 studies meeting our inclusion criteria. Using a narrative synthesis approach, these studies were analyzed in terms of the characteristics of the participants, methodology, results, and quality of the evidence. Results Among the 48 studies, 112,473 participants (56% male), mean age (of the total sample) was 21, represented across ten countries. Twenty-one studies reported that young men with disabilities had better employment outcomes than women with disabilities. Eight studies showed that females with disabilities had better employment outcomes than males. Five studies reported that there were no gender differences in employment outcomes for youth with various disabilities. With regards to maintaining employment, men with disabilities often work more hours and have better wages compared to women with disabilities. There are several gender-related barriers and facilitators to maintaining employment including social supports and gender role expectations. Conclusions Our findings highlight that there is a critical need for gender-specific vocational supports for young adults with disabilities.
KeywordsGender Employment Vocational rehabilitation Youth Adolescents
This study was funded by the Ontario Ministry of Research and Innovation.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
- 2.World Bank. Gender differences in employment and why they matter. In: World development report 2012: gender equality and development 2012. https://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/abs/10.1596/9780821388105_ch5. Accessed 22 June 2017.
- 4.US Department of Labor. BLS spotlight on statistics: women at work. 2011 employment and why they matter. In: World development report 2012: gender equality and development 2012. https://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/abs/10.1596/9780821388105_ch5. Accessed 22 Jun 2017.
- 8.World Health Organization. International classification of functioning, disability, and health: children & youth version. 2007. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/43737/1/9789241547321_eng.pdf. Accessed 4 Aug 2015
- 13.Lindsay S. Enablers and barriers affecting motor vehicle transportation for youth with physical disabilities: a scoping review. New York: Nova Science Publishers; 2017.Google Scholar
- 17.Kingsnorth S, Lindsay S, Maxwell J, Tsybina I, Seo H, Macarthur C, et al. Implementation of the lifespan model of transition care across pediatric and adult rehabilitation providers. Int J Child Adolesc Health. 2011;3(4):547–560.Google Scholar
- 20.Hanif S, McDougall C, Lindsay S. A systematic review of vocational interventions for youth with disabilities. Res Soc Sci Disabil. 2017;10:175–196.Google Scholar
- 21.McCloy U, DeClou L. Disability in Ontario: postsecondary education participation rates, student experience and labour market outcomes. Toronto: Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario; 2013.Google Scholar
- 26.Doren B, Gau JM, Lindstrom L. The role of gender in the long-term employment outcomes of young adults with disabilities. J Vocat Rehab. 2011;34(1):35–42.Google Scholar
- 28.Lusk SL, Cook D. Enhancing career exploration, decision making, and problem solving of adolescent girls with disabilities. J Vocat Rehab. 2009;31(3):145–153.Google Scholar
- 37.Baldridge DC, Swift ML. Withholding requests for disability accommodation the role of individual differences and disability attributes. J Manag. 2013;39(3):743–762.Google Scholar
- 42.Petticrew M, Roberts H. Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide. Hoboken: Wiley; 2008.Google Scholar
- 44.Kmet L, Lee R, Cook L. Standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers from a variety of fields. Edmonton: Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (AHFMR); 2004; HTA initiative #13.Google Scholar
- 45.Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, et al. The prisma statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1–e34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 60.Schaller J, Yang N, Trainor A. Transition-age adults with adhd: gender and predictors of vocational rehabilitation outcomes. J Appl Rehab Couns. 2006;37(1):3−12.Google Scholar
- 62.Murphy ME, Holzer CE, 3rd, Richardson LM, Epperson K, Ojeda S, Martinez EM, et al. Quality of life of young adult survivors of pediatric burns using world health organization disability assessment scale ii and burn specific health scale-brief: a comparison. J Burn Care Res. 2015;36(5):521–533.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 78.Assembly UG. Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. GA Res. 2006;61:106.Google Scholar