Open Forum: Surviving the Tornado of Mental Illness: Psychiatric Survivors' Experiences of Getting, Losing, and Keeping Housing
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
This qualitative study explored experiences of psychiatric consumer-survivors related to housing. Nine focus groups involving 90 people were conducted in urban and rural areas in South-Western Ontario. A set of open-ended questions was used. Many participants described a devastating experience of losing much of what was important to them and going through a long arduous process to rebuild their lives. Group discussions were audiotaped and transcribed. Individual and team analyses of the transcripts revealed that psychiatric survivors experienced three levels of upheaval, loss, and destruction, similar to the effects of a tornado: losing ground, struggling to survive, and gaining stability. Within each of these levels, five major themes were identified: living in fear, losing control of basic human rights, attempting to hold onto and create relationships, identifying supports and seeking services, and obtaining personal space and place. A caring community response, including adequate housing, income support, and community care, can help people rebuild their lives.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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