Changes in daily substance use among people experiencing homelessness and mental illness: 24‐month outcomes following randomization to Housing First or usual care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Housing First (HF) is an established intervention for people experiencing homelessness and mental illness. We compared daily substance use (DSU) between HF and treatment as usual (TAU). DESIGN: Two concurrent randomized controlled trials with 24-month follow-up. SETTING: Market rental apartments with support provided by Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) or Intensive Case Management (ICM); a single building with on-site supports (CONG); TAU in Vancouver, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion criteria were current homelessness and mental illness. Participants were assessed as having either 'high needs' (HN; n = 297) or 'moderate needs' (MN; n = 200). MN participants were randomized to ICM (n = 100) or MN-TAU (n = 100). HN participants were randomized to ACT (n = 90), CONG (n = 107) or HN-TAU (n = 100). INTERVENTIONS AND COMPARATORS: All HF interventions included independent housing with support services, with an emphasis on promoting client choice and harm reduction in relation to substance use. TAU included existing services and support available to homeless adults with mental illness. MEASUREMENTS: DSU over 24 and 12 months was derived from the Maudsley Addiction Profile. Also measured were demographics, homelessness history, psychiatric diagnoses, symptom severity, comorbid illnesses and duration of stable housing. FINDINGS: Compared with HN-TAU, neither CONG [adjusted odds (AOR) ratio = 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.39-1.37] nor ACT (AOR = 1.22, 95% CI = 0.61-2.45) differed on DSU at 24 months, and MN-TAU did not differ from ICM (AOR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.37-1.63). There were no differences at 12 months, when analyses were restricted to participants who indicated substance use at baseline, or when considering the duration of stable housing. CONCLUSIONS: Housing First, an intervention to support recovery for homeless people who have co-occurring mental illness and substance use disorders, did not reduce daily substance use compared with treatment as usual after 12 or 24 months.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".