Hitting Home: A Survey of Housing Conditions of Homes Used for Long-Term Care in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A telephone survey of a random sample of 811 long-term home care clients from three geographically distinct regions in Ontario was conducted to illuminate the living and working conditions in households receiving long-term care services. The median age of clients was 77 years and 75 percent were female. The majority had not completed high school. Almost half were widowed, had income levels of dollar 20,000 (Canadian) or less, and lived alone. Approximately one-third needed help with most basic activities of daily living. The vast majority could not bathe or dress themselves. More than three-quarters needed help with preparing meals, housekeeping, and shopping. Few clients could perform yardwork and home repairs. Many clients' homes required major and minor repairs, were not suitable in size, were not affordable, and lacked important household amenities. More than 30 percent required modifications to enable clients to live and be cared for comfortably and safely, and half the clients had not completed these because of exorbitant costs. Overall, many clients were living in homes less than optimal for domestic life and long-term care provision. These results highlight significant gaps in care provision and a need to link housing to health and social service policies.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".