Differential experiences of discrimination among ethnoracially diverse persons experiencing mental illness and homelessness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This mixed methods study explored the characteristics of and experiences with perceived discrimination in an ethnically diverse urban sample of adults experiencing homelessness and mental illness. METHODS: Data were collected in Toronto, Ontario, as part of a 4-year national randomized field trial of the Housing First treatment model. Rates of perceived discrimination were captured from survey questions regarding perceived discrimination among 231 ethnoracially diverse participants with moderate mental health needs. The qualitative component included thirty six in-depth interviews which explored how individuals who bear these multiple identities of oppression navigate stigma and discrimination, and what affects their capacity to do so. RESULTS: Quantitative analysis revealed very high rates of perceived discrimination related to: homelessness/poverty (61.5%), race/ethnicity/skin colour (50.6%) and mental illness/substance use (43.7%). Immigrants and those who had been homeless three or more years reported higher perceived discrimination on all three domains. Analysis of qualitative interviews revealed three common themes related to navigating these experiences of discrimination among participants: 1) social distancing; 2) old and new labels/identities; and, 3) 'homeland' cultures. CONCLUSIONS: These study findings underscore poverty and homelessness as major sources of perceived discrimination, and expose underlying complexities in the navigation of multiple identities in responding to stigma and discrimination. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN42520374 . Registered 18 August 2009.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".