Inuit housing and homelessness: results from the International Polar Year Inuit Health Survey 2007–2008
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Evaluate housing characteristics across Inuit regions in Canada that participated in the 2007-2008 International Polar Year (IPY) Inuit Health Survey. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional Inuit Health Survey. METHODS: Housing characteristics were ascertained as part of the IPY Inuit Health Survey through interviews conducted in 33 coastal and 3 inland communities, representing all communities in the Inuvialuit Settlement Region (ISR) of NWT, Nunavut and Nunatsiavut of northern Labrador. Variable descriptive statistics were weighted and presented by region and by whether children were present or not in each household. RESULTS: A total of 2,796 Inuit households were approached, of which 68% participated (n=1,901 households). In ISR and Nunavut, approximately 20% of homes provided shelter to the homeless compared to 12% in Nunatsiavut (p≤0.05). The prevalence of public housing and household crowding also varied by region, with Nunavut having a statistically significantly higher prevalence of crowding (30%) than Nunatsiavut (12%) and ISR (12%). Household crowding was more prevalent among homes with children. Overall, 40% of homes were in need of major repairs and problems with mould were reported in 20% of households. CONCLUSIONS: Adequate shelter is a basic human need and an essential foundation for thriving population health. The results indicate that improvements in housing indicators are needed. Of utmost concern is the high prevalence of overcrowding in Inuit homes with children, which poses potential consequences for children's health and well-being. Further, the high percentage of homes providing shelter to the homeless suggests that hidden homelessness needs to be addressed by further research and program implementation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".