Young people, drug use and family conflict: Pathways into homelessness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Young people who experience homelessness, in Australia and in other western contexts (US, Canada, England), are widely perceived to use and abuse alcohol and drugs. The available research indicates that homeless young people use all drug types, whether injected or otherwise, more frequently than their home-based peers. Debate exists in the research and policy literature about whether drug use is a cause or consequence of homelessness. In a study exploring homeless young peoples reasons for leaving home, we examined the relationship between young people's drug use and their pathways into homelessness. Brief qualitative interviews were conducted with 302 homeless young people (12-20 years). Following a thematic analysis of interview transcripts, four pathways into homelessness involving personal or familial drug use were identified. One-third of the participants indicated that personal or familial drug use was a critical factor in them leaving home. Of these, just over half indicated that personal drug use was a direct or indirect cause of their homelessness and one-quarter indicated that familial drug and alcohol use was the critical factor that led them to leaving home. One-quarter indicated that their drug use only began after they became homeless. Family conflict, if not family breakdown, was implicated in all four pathways out of home.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".