Multiple Paths to Just Ends: Using Narrative Interviews and Timelines to Explore Health Equity and Homelessness
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Underlying the daily lives of people with experiences of homelessness and mental illness is a complex interplay of individual and structural factors that perpetuate cycles of inequity. The introduction of novel methodological combinations within qualitative research has the potential to advance knowledge regarding the experience of health equity by such individuals and to clarify the relationship between these experiences and broader structural inequities. To explore the lived experience of inequity, we present a thematic analysis of narrative interviews in conjunction with timelines from 31 adults experiencing homelessness and mental illness. Use of these methods together enabled a novel and expanded appreciation for the varied ways in which differential access to the social determinants of health influences the trajectories and experiences of inequity for people who are homeless and mentally ill. The further utility of these methods for better understanding the experience of inequity is explored and implications for research, policy, and practice are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it