Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Although Housing First (HF) is a popular evidence-based intervention for persons experiencing homelessness and mental illness, research exploring its sustainability over time is scant. This mixed methods study captures practitioners' perspectives on key shifts in implementation of Housing First in a large urban center, and factors affecting fidelity to the model over time. Methods: This study uses fidelity assessments, at baseline and 18-months later, completed as part of the largest field trial of Housing First to date, and qualitative data from 28 front-line service providers and their managers. Results: Our findings reveal how the shifting landscape of implementation morphed some early troublespots into persistent challenges and exposed key factors facilitating fidelity to the model in a dynamic context. Conclusions: This study supports the importance of gathering provider perspectives over time to optimize the fit between the model and its changing local contexts and ensure maximal benefit of the intervention.
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.
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 | 0.015 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.003 |
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 it