| Title |
Work Accommodations and Natural Supports for Employees with Severe Mental Illness in Social Businesses: An International Comparison
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Community Mental Health Journal, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10597-016-0068-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patrizia Villotti, Marc Corbière, Ellie Fossey, Franco Fraccaroli, Tania Lecomte, Carol Harvey |
| Abstract |
Little is known about the types of work accommodations and natural supports that are useful for people experiencing severe mental illness working in social businesses. We conducted an exploratory, descriptive and cross-sectional investigation in Australia, Canada and Italy to study the nature of work accommodations and natural supports available in social businesses. Study findings are drawn from survey responses of a convenience sample of 90 employees with self-reported psychiatric disabilities. Results showed that, regardless of the country, social businesses provide many work accommodations and natural supports, especially those linked to schedule flexibility and support, while work accommodations related to training and schedule flexibility were linked to longer job tenure. Overall, this study advances our knowledge about the spectrum of work accommodations and natural supports that are available in social businesses for people with severe mental illness. Also, it highlights the type of work accommodations that are likely to support this population to sustain employment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 67% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 74 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 15% |
| Researcher | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 8% |
| Professor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 23 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 13 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 12% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 18% |
| Unknown | 25 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 October 2017.
All research outputs
#13,414,068
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from Community Mental Health Journal
#638
of 1,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,292
of 416,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Community Mental Health Journal
#8
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,288 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 416,044 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.