Perspectives of homeless people on their health and health needs priorities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: This paper is a report of a study of the perspectives of homeless individuals on their health and healthcare needs. BACKGROUND: Many studies show the high incidence and severity of diseases, physical and mental, amongst the homeless populations. However, the views of homeless people themselves are usually omitted. In order to provide appropriate care, healthcare professionals need to be aware of these perspectives. METHOD: A descriptive, exploratory design, using semi-structured interviews and observational field notes, was chosen for this qualitative study. A convenience sample of 24 participants experiencing homelessness was recruited in one Canadian city in 2005. FINDINGS: Participants described their health and healthcare needs in a holistic sense. They reported concerns about physical illnesses, mental health, addictions and stress. Shelter life promoted spread of diseases and lacked privacy. Violence was rampant in shelters and on the streets, leading to constant fear. There was emotional distress over social exclusion and depersonalization. Participants wanted to work and to be housed, yet felt trapped in a dehumanizing system. CONCLUSION: The recommendations are (a) elimination or mitigation of most health problems of the homeless through safe, affordable housing; (b) reintegration into the community through job counselling, treatment of addictions and employment. Negative societal attitudes towards these clients need to change. Healthcare professionals, particularly community nurses, have opportunities to collaborate respectfully with these clients and work for changes in public policies, such as national housing and addiction treatment policies, and for streamlined, humanized services to smooth the processes of social reintegration.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".