MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W182322105

Social Housing with Community Support: A Study of the FOHM Experience

2000· article· en· W182322105 on OpenAlexaffabout
Luc Thériault, Christian Jetté, Réjean Mathieu, Yves Vaillancourt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHermeneutics and Narrative Identity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDocumentationMental healthPublic relationsPublic housingBusinessFocus groupSociologyPsychologyNursingPolitical scienceMarketingMedicinePsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the results of an evaluation of the social housing program of the Fédération des OSBL d’habitation de Montréal (FOHM) (Montreal Federation of Housing Non-profit Organizations). This organization directly manages 325 units occupied by tenants who suf-fer from physical or mental health problems, contend with drug or alcohol addiction, or have AIDS. Triangulation [Denzin and Lincoln 1994] of the data was achieved using the following strat-egies: 33 tenants from three different housing units were interviewed using a survey question-naire. Focus groups were conducted with front-line staff as well as with administrators and external partners of the FOHM. Documentation of the literature on the social housing sector’s management and support practices augmented the picture. The findings indicate that the pro-gram has improved the quality of life of the ten-ants, although this improvement was more sig-nificant in some aspects of their lives than in others. Overall, the evaluation provides evidence of the need for this type of program as well as for better integrated social policies in the areas of housing, health and social services.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0190.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHermeneutics and Narrative IdentityFrench-language works237,207