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
OBJECTIVE: This paper discusses choice in mental health supported housing, providing results from a longitudinal study of two models of supported housing (a higher support and a lower support model). METHODS: The progress of 27 tenants at the two sites was tracked on measures of satisfaction with housing, social support satisfaction, mental health, physical health, and mastery over the course of one year. Measurements were taken at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. RESULTS: Although there were trends toward positive changes at both sites, with the Bonferroni adjustment, only positive within group changes in perceptions of physical health between baseline and 12 months at the higher support site endured. There were no significant differences in changes between the two sites. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that there appears to be some support for the positive effects of choice in mental health supported housing. Further research in this area will require flexible programming and funding that create opportunities for true partnerships with consumer-survivors.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 it