A Systematic Review of Cognitive Deficits in Homeless Adults: Implications for Service Delivery
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
OBJECTIVE: The primary goals of this systematic review were to assess studies of homeless adults and cognitive functioning, and to explore the clinical implications and potential impacts on social functioning of these cognitive deficits. METHOD: The MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, ERIC, Social Sciences Abstracts, Social Sciences Citation Index, Social Services Abstracts, and Sociological Abstracts databases were searched from 1970 (or their inception) to October 2007. Abstracts from 582 studies were screened and 22 studies were found to meet inclusion criteria (published in the English language, reported results of neuropsychological tests, or screening tests for cognitive dysfunction in homeless people aged 18 years or older). Two investigators independently reviewed each study and rated its quality based on well-defined criteria. RESULTS: Ten studies were of good or fair quality. Studies that administered the Mini Mental State Examination indicate about 4% to 7% of homeless people exhibit global cognitive deficits. Focal deficits in verbal and visual memory, attention, speed of cognitive processing, and executive function were also apparent. No studies of the functional implications of cognitive deficits were found. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive deficits in homeless people likely have a significant mediating impact on the effectiveness of skills training and rehabilitation programs. Clinicians should be cognizant that cognitive deficits probably impair homeless patients' ability to maintain housing stability and follow treatment recommendations. Implications for housing options and health service delivery should also be considered. Research is lacking on interventions to improve cognitive functioning in the homeless.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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