Youth Experience of Trying to Get off the Street: What has Helped and Hindered L'expérience de jeunes essayant de ne plus vivre dans la rue : ce qui a aidé, ce qui a nui
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study involved 20 youth (18 male, 1 female, 1 transgender, ages 19–24) living in Vancouver, British Columbia, who reported 259 critical incidents of what helped or hindered their experiences as they tried to get off the street. What helped included (a) taking responsibility, (b) engaging in constructive activities, (c) friends and family sup port, (d) changing drug and alcohol use, (e) support from professional organizations, (f ) disillusionment with street life, (g) dreams and hope for a different future, (h) income assistance, and (i) leaving negative influences behind. What hindered included (a) drugs and alcohol; (b) emotional struggles; (c) lack of support; (d) enjoyment of homelessness; (e) limited formal education, life skills, and employment; and (f ) income assistance dif ficulties. The results are discussed in relation to implications and recommendations for practice, limitations, and future research. resume
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".