MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

From Youth to Adult Homelessness

2008· article· en· W1601743923 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Guy Johnson, Chris Chamberlain

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Social Issues · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)AccommodationQuarter (Canadian coin)Project commissioningSociologyPublishingPsychologyGerontologyPolitical scienceMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Governments have shown an interest in early intervention strategies to reduce youth homelessness, but critics say that early intervention programs lack clear outcomes. This paper investigates what happens when early intervention programs are not in place and young people progress to adult homelessness. The paper assesses the ‘social adaptation’ hypothesis that the longer young people are homeless the more they adapt to homelessness as a way of life. The paper uses information on 1,677 individuals who first became homeless when they were 18 or younger. Three‐quarters of the sample had progressed to adult homelessness (defined as 25 or older) and one‐quarter were now young adults aged 19 to 24. The findings confirm that the longer people are homeless, the more difficult it becomes to get out of homelessness. However, the social adaptation account overstates the extent to which people accept homelessness as a ‘way of life‘. People can return to conventional accommodation if they are given long‐term support. The paper concludes with three policy recommendations.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.326 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations78
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of Social IssuesSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207