Cited by 80Disability Education and EmploymentEmployment and Welfare StudiesHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

Benefits and costs of supported employment from three perspectives

Clark, Robin E., Xie, Haiyi, Becker, Deborah R., Drake, Robert E.·1998·The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research

Abstract

Administrators, consumers, and policy makers are increasingly interested in supported employment as a way of helping persons with severe mental illness get and keep competitive jobs. However, in an atmosphere of increased expectations for performance and declining public financing, administrators want to know the costs and benefits of different approaches before they reallocate scarce treatment or rehabilitative dollars. This article discusses the net benefits of two approaches to supported employment that were compared in a randomized trial: Individual Placement and Support (IPS) and Group Skills Training (GST). The authors analyze costs and benefits from societal, government, and consumer perspectives. Although a previous analysis showed that IPS participants were significantly more likely to find work, worked more hours, and had higher earnings, net benefits of the two programs were not significantly different. The authors also discuss some of the strengths and weaknesses of cost-benefit analysis in mental health care and suggest future directions for policy and research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf02287497

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Secondary outcomes for people with disabilities included improved quality of life, enhanced self-confidence, a source of earnings or income, an expanded social network, and a sense of community.

    “Secondary outcomes included benefits for people with disabilities themselves such as improved quality of life [53], enhanced self-confidence [18,74,75,77], a source of earnings or income [78,79], an expanded social network [79], and a sense of a community [79].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Clark, R. E., Xie, H., Becker, D. R., & Drake, R. E.
Affiliations
  • Dartmouth College (US)
  • Dartmouth Psychiatric Research Center (US)
Corresponding author
Clark, Robin E.
Venue
The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research
Published
1998-02
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
22-34
ISSN
  • 1094-3412 (ISSN-L)
  • 1556-3308
OpenAlex
W2008795672
Cited by
80
References
34
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
FWCI
6.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship@UMassChan (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Healthway
  • National Institutes of Health (5k02mh000839-10, 5r18mh047650-03)
  • Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH-00839, MH-47650)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Employment and Welfare Studies
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
supported employment, severe mental illness, Individual Placement and Support, group skills training, cost-benefit analysis, societal perspective, government perspective, customer perspective, employment effects, earnings, mental health policy
MeSH terms
Adult, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Rehabilitation, Vocational, Vocational Education, Employment, Supported, Persons with Intellectual Disabilities, Persons with Mental Disabilities

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review