Catalano Denise, Pereira Ana Paula, Wu Ming-Yi, Ho Hanson, Chan Fong
Department of Rehabilitation, Social Work and Addictions, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA.
NeuroRehabilitation. 2006;21(4):279-93.
This study analyzed the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) case service report (RSA-911) data for fiscal year 2004 to examine effects of demographic characteristics, work disincentives, and vocational rehabilitation services patterns on employment outcomes of persons with traumatic brain injuries (TBI). The results indicated that European Americans (53%) had appreciably higher competitive employment rates than Native American (50%), Asian Americans (44%), African Americans (42%), and Hispanic/Latino Americans (41%). Clients without co-occurring psychiatric disabilities had a higher employment rate (51%) than those with psychiatric disabilities (45%). Clients without work disincentives showed better employment outcomes (58%) than those with disincentives (45%). An important finding from this analysis was the central role of job search assistance, job placement assistance, and on-the-job support services for persons with TBI in predicting employment outcomes. A data mining technique, the exhaustive CHAID analysis, was used to examine the interaction effects of race, gender, work disincentives and service variables on employment outcomes. The results indicated that the TBI clients in this study could be segmented into 29 homogeneous subgroups with employment rates ranging from a low of 11% to a high of 82%, and these differences can be explained by differences in work disincentives, race, and rehabilitation service patterns.
本研究分析了康复服务管理局(RSA)2004财年的案例服务报告(RSA - 911)数据,以考察人口统计学特征、工作激励因素及职业康复服务模式对创伤性脑损伤(TBI)患者就业结果的影响。结果表明,欧裔美国人(53%)的竞争性就业率明显高于美洲原住民(50%)、亚裔美国人(44%)、非裔美国人(42%)以及西班牙裔/拉丁裔美国人(41%)。未并发精神障碍的患者就业率(51%)高于患有精神障碍的患者(45%)。没有工作激励因素的患者就业结果(58%)优于有激励因素的患者(45%)。该分析的一项重要发现是,求职援助、工作安置援助及在职支持服务对TBI患者就业结果的预测起着核心作用。采用了一种数据挖掘技术——穷举CHAID分析,来考察种族、性别、工作激励因素及服务变量对就业结果的交互作用。结果表明,本研究中的TBI患者可被分为29个同质亚组,就业率从低至11%到高至82%不等,这些差异可通过工作激励因素、种族及康复服务模式的差异来解释。