MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972975891 · doi:10.1177/019394590102300704

Research with Homeless People Uncovers a Model of Health

2001· article· en· W1972975891 on OpenAlexaff
Dianne McCormack, Judith MacIntosh

Bibliographic record

VenueWestern Journal of Nursing Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of FrederictonUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth belief modelAction (physics)PsychologyGrounded theoryHealth servicesPopulationSocial psychologyGerontologyHealth promotionNursingSociologyMedicinePublic healthQualitative researchEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This grounded theory research study, explored health experiences of 11 homeless persons in shelters in three New Brunswick cities and the strategies that they used to attain, maintain, or regain health. Audiotaped interviews were conducted, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed. The model that emerged from analysis consists of three pathways to health. This model of health has two central components, person and health. Person is influenced directly by family values and beliefs, and directly and indirectly by societal values and beliefs. Health is the outcome and is reached through two mediating factors of lifestyle behaviors and sector services. The first pathway to health contains the mediating factor of lifestyle behaviors, the second contains the mediating factor of sector services, and the third contains both mediating factors. Pathway strategies of choosing, accessing, and appraising appropriateness of methods influence the active participation of the person that directs the action within the model. Implications of the study include that a fragmented system of help hinders access to services intended to promote health in this population.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.024
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.419
GPT teacher head0.595
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations37
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWestern Journal of Nursing ResearchSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207