MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981298740 · doi:10.2975/31.2.2007.115.124

A participatory benchmarking strategy for describing and improving supportive housing.

2007· article· en· W1981298740 on OpenAlexafffundabout
John Sylvestre, Melanie Ollenberg, John Trainor

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatric Rehabilitation Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCity of Toronto
KeywordsSupportive housingBenchmarkingCitizen journalismService delivery frameworkBusinessProcess managementHousing FirstParticipatory planningMental healthParticipatory action researchService (business)NursingKnowledge managementPsychologyMedicineEnvironmental planningSociologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceMental illnessMarketingPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a participatory research project conducted to document good practice in the delivery of supportive housing programs. Stakeholders in a local mental health housing system in Toronto, Ontario worked collaboratively to develop 40 service benchmarks for supportive housing programs and to recommend practices for achieving these benchmarks. The findings are discussed in terms of their implications for the delivery of supportive housing and strategies for improving these programs.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.361
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations12
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatric Rehabilitation JournalSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207