MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326800812 · doi:10.1055/s-0031-1277825

The At Home/Chez Soi Canadian Study of Housing First for people who are homeless and mentally ill: study design and baseline data for the Montreal site

2011· article· en· W2326800812 on OpenAlex
Éric Latimer, Daniel Rabouin

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatrische Praxis · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsDouglas Mental Health University Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAssertive community treatmentSupportive housingHousing FirstMental illnessMental healthGerontologyPsychologySubsidyBaseline (sea)Adaptation (eye)MedicinePsychiatryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Objectives: The „Pathways to Housing“ service model for helping people who are homeless and severely mentally ill, developed in New York City, involves providing immediate access to a choice of subsidized, scattered site apartments, together with a recovery-oriented adaptation of Assertive Community Treatment. U.S. evidence suggests that this variant of the „Housing First“ approach is more effective than traditional, step-wise services at helping people to become and remain housed, while increasing perceived choice with regards to housing. It has not yet been experimentally evaluated outside the United States, however. There is even less evidence concerning how this model can be adapted to homeless persons with less severe mental illness. A CAN$110-million, 5-year experimental study of both the Pathways version of Housing First, and an Intensive Case Management (ICM) adaptation for people with less severe mental illness, has been mounted in Canada. Called „At Home/Chez Soi“, the study is being carried out simultaneously in 5 Canadian cities: Vancouver, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal, and Moncton. After a brief description of the genesis and organization of the study, the experimental approaches being tested in each city will be described. The common screening and psychometric instruments that form the core batteries being used in each city will be described. Implementation and sub-studies at the Montreal site will be described in more detail. Baseline data on the participant sample in Montreal will be provided.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.645
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it