Factors associated with homelessness of adolescents under supervision of the youth protection system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are two factors that limit our knowledge of the risk factors associated with homelessness among runaway adolescents, namely (1) the samples used are often composed of youth homeless service users and/or youths living on the streets (visible homelessness), whereas most adolescents in fact use "private" resources (hidden homelessness), and (2) failure to use an adequate control group to identify risk factors associated specifically with homelessness. Our study compares the characteristics of two groups of youths under the supervision of the youth protection system, according to the presence or absence of periods of homelessness. The results throw light on the factors underlying the shift from "at risk" to "homeless", showing that youths with experience of homelessness are more likely to have been placed in substitute home environments, have experienced significant relationship difficulties with one of their parents (deterioration of the parent/youth relationship and parental abuse) and to have been diagnosed with behavioural disorders. The findings suggest that the decision to place young people under supervision is based more on the dynamic between risk factors rather than on the existence of behavioural problems.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".