MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999485953 · doi:10.1177/0013916504270697

Housing Tenure and Psychological Well-Being During Adolescence

2005· article· en· W1999485953 on OpenAlexaff
John Cairney

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Behavior · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHousing tenureRentingPsychologyIndependence (probability theory)Association (psychology)Psychological well-beingPsychological healthSample (material)Work (physics)GerontologyDemographic economicsDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyEconomicsMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although a substantial body of work has demonstrated that housing tenure (home ownership vs. renting) is a determinant of health, much less work has focused on this relationship between children and adolescents. This is a significant omission as there is good reason to hypothesize that the effect of housing status on health may change with age. In particular, growing independence and reduced exposure to the residential environment may attenuate the association between housing tenure and health as children age. Using a large representative sample of adolescents, ages 12 to 19 years old, the hypothesis that age moderates the relationship between housing tenure and psychological well-being is tested. The findings, in general, support the hypothesis. Future directions for research are discussed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 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

Citations49
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and BehaviorSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207