MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7024182937

A qualitative study of presently and formerly homeless female adolescents (Ontario)

2001· article· en· W7024182937 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University) · 2001
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueHomelessness and Social Issues
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésQualitative researchSample (material)Young adultFocus groupQualitative propertyAge groupsQualitative analysis
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Very little research has been carried out with young homeless females in Canada. Therefore, the following study investigated homeless in the Kitchener-Waterloo Region, in two age groups of female adolescents from two different types of settings, a youth drop in centre and a female youth shelter. One sample of 8 female youth was between the ages of 14-19 and was presently homeless. The other sample was an older group of 5 individuals between the ages of 19-27, who had experienced homelessness in their earlier adolescent years. A semi-structured, open-ended interview was carried out with these 13 females. The interview was also structured to capture their life story. They were asked questions about their childhood, their family, their schooling, their homeless experience and their future. The older sample of females was also asked questions about their pathway out of homelessness. Three broad research objectives were outlined: to develop an in-depth understanding of females’ experiences of homelessness; to identify and link the individual, family, school and structural risk factors that are critical for female adolescent homelessness in the K-W region, as described by these adolescents; and to compare the similarities and differences that may emerge between two age groups of female youth regarding their homeless experiences and to identify the protective factors that were important for the older group in their pathway out of homelessness. A qualitative analysis of the results revealed that there were two types of homelessness stories, a street story and a shelter story, and that there were a number of substantial differences between the two stories, including drug use, sexual behavior, negative school experiences and no contact with their biological father, which suggested that the street story was associated with greater risks. However, addressing the second research objective, all of these female youth were experiencing multiple risk factors at all the three levels, individual, family-school-peer and structural, therefore increasing their chances of becoming homeless. Having supportive and caring relationships and learning about themselves were the two primary factors that seemed to have been important for the older youth in finding their pathway out of homelessness. Also, there were some noteworthy differences in the comments of the two age groups. For example, the younger group of female youth spoke about how their friends became more important than school, and their close siblings and peer relations. Whereas, the older group of females spoke about sibling abuse, their concrete plans regarding their schooling and they used mental health terminology, such as depression and suicide. Overall, both age groups had experienced a number of family conflicts, had negative relationships with their mother, had very little contact with their fathers and described similar homeless and school experiences. The stories documented by this thesis in the area of female youth homelessness provide a number of possible suggestions for future research with this particular population of homeless youth. Homelessness is a complicated issue and a single intervention program designed for homeless youth in general is not going to address the varied types of homeless situations that different youth face. The streets, with all of their dangers and hazards, appear to entrench the youth that go to them, likely making it harder for them to find their pathway out of homelessness. We have to address all youth’s individual needs, by helping them to feel connected to their families, schools, and communities.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,269
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,540

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0170,008
Communication savante0,0030,002
Science ouverte0,0020,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,063
Tête enseignante GPT0,380
Écart entre enseignants0,318 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2001
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University)→Même sujetHomelessness and Social Issues→Travaux en français237 207→