Cited by 361Disability Education and EmploymentRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentDisability Rights and Representation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 80 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 24 of the 226 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

A Systematic Review of the Benefits of Hiring People with Disabilities

Open access
Lindsay, Sally, Cagliostro, Elaine, Albarico, Mikhaela, Mortaji, Neda, Karon, Leora·2018·Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation

Abstract

Purpose We reviewed literature on the benefits of hiring people with disabilities. Increasing attention is being paid to the role of people with disabilities in the workplace. Although most research focuses on employers' concerns, many companies are now beginning to share their successes. However, there is no synthesis of the peer-reviewed literature on the benefits of hiring people with disabilities. Methods Our team conducted a systematic review, completing comprehensive searches of seven databases from 1997 to May 2017. We selected articles for inclusion that were peer-reviewed publications, had a sample involving people with disabilities, conducted an empirical study with at least one outcome focusing on the benefits of hiring people with disabilities, and focused on competitive employment. Two reviewers independently applied the inclusion criteria, extracted the data, and rated the study quality. Results Of the 6176 studies identified in our search, 39 articles met our inclusion criteria. Findings show that benefits of hiring people with disabilities included improvements in profitability (e.g., profits and cost-effectiveness, turnover and retention, reliability and punctuality, employee loyalty, company image), competitive advantage (e.g., diverse customers, customer loyalty and satisfaction, innovation, productivity, work ethic, safety), inclusive work culture, and ability awareness. Secondary benefits for people with disabilities included improved quality of life and income, enhanced self-confidence, expanded social network, and a sense of community. Conclusions There are several benefits to hiring people with disabilities. Further research is needed to explore how benefits may vary by type of disability, industry, and job type.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10926-018-9756-z

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

73 No full text of the sources · 27 Own result · 17 Not checked yet · 11 Sources not found · 8 Partly supported · 7 Couldn’t confirm · 7 Own method · 6 Own interpretation · 5 Supported so far · 5 No basis given · accuracy not yet measured

Verify all 9 references — free account

Show all 116 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 34
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 3
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 14
50 of 50
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The benefits reported by the included studies reflect actual effects of hiring people with disabilities rather than only perceptions, confounding, or other explanations.

    “Further, most studies focused on perceived benefits rather than actual benefits.”
    “Findings show that benefits of hiring people with disabilities included improvements in profitability”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The heterogeneous studies and outcome measures included in the review can be meaningfully synthesized into the review's benefit categories despite the inability to conduct a meta-analysis.

    “A meta-analysis was not feasible for this review because of the heterogeneity of the studies reviewed (i.e., range of disability types, study populations, and outcome measures).”
    “Therefore, we synthesized our findings according to the guidelines for narrative synthesis [37].”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Including all studies regardless of their quality scores does not materially undermine the review's synthesized conclusions.

    “We did not exclude any studies from our review based on quality.”
    “The overall scores for the quantitative studies ranged from 0.4 to 0.91 (mean 0.76) ( S3 Table).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Policies, tax incentives, and societal attitudes toward disabled people differ substantially across countries and over time.

    “Second, policies, tax incentives, and societal attitudes towards people with disabilities vary greatly by country and across time.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The amount of workplace support disabled people receive likely differs substantially across countries.

    “nor the extent of supports they may have received within their job, which likely vary greatly by country.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Education, job experience, and hours worked are important determinants of employment outcomes.

    “which are important factors in employment outcomes.”
6 of 6

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

5 of 5

Citations

Cites

Show all 80 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Forbes Insights. Global diversity and inclusion: fostering innovation through a diverse workforce. New York: Forbes Insight; 2011.
  2. Lindsay S, McDougall C, Sanford R. Exploring supervisors’ attitudes of working with youth engaged in an inclusive employment training program. J Hum Dev Disabil Soc Change. 2014;20(3):12–20.
  3. Rehabilitation Services Administration. Reporting manual for the case service report (RSA-911). Washington, DC: RSA; 2004. Report No.: RSA-PD-04-04.
  4. Allen J, Cohen N. The road to inclusion: integrating people with disabilities into the workplace. Toronto: Deloitte; 2010.
  5. National Council on Disability. Empowerment for Americans with disabilities: breaking barriers to careers and full employment. Washington, DC: National Council on Disability; 2007.
  6. Hernandez B, McDonald K. Exploring the costs and benefits of workers with disabilities. J Rehabil. 2010;76(3):15–23.
  7. Equity and Diversity Directorate Policy Branch. Recruitment of persons with disabilities: a literature review. Ottawa, ON: Public Service Commission of Canada; 2011.
  8. Connelly LM. Peer review. MedSurg Nursing. 2017;26(6):146–147.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 293

Metadata

Authors
Lindsay, S., Cagliostro, E., Albarico, M., Mortaji, N., & Karon, L.
Affiliations
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital (CA)
Corresponding author
Lindsay, Sally
Venue
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation
Published
2018-02-01
Volume
28
Issue
4
Pages
634-655
ISSN
  • 1053-0487 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3688
OpenAlex
W2789644460
Cited by
361
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 62 · 2025: 67 · 2024: 63 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 7
FWCI
5.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • TSpace (University of Toronto) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Ontario Ministry of Research and Innovation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Disability Education and Employment
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Retirement, Disability, and Employment
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disability Rights and Representation
Keywords
employment of people with disabilities, competitive employment, workplace inclusion, profitability, inclusive work culture, employee loyalty, customer loyalty, productivity, quality of life, self-confidence, disability awareness, employer benefits
MeSH terms
Economic Competition, Efficiency, Employment, Persons with Disabilities, Humans, Income, Personnel Loyalty, Personnel Management, Personnel Selection, Personnel Turnover, Quality of Life, Organizational Culture, Self Efficacy

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-04, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-04 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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