MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Upstream Disaster Management to Support People Experiencing Homelessness

2015· article· en· W2337385362 on OpenAlex

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

VenuePLoS Currents · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommunity resiliencePreparednessResilience (materials science)Context (archaeology)Emergency managementPublic relationsPopulationVulnerability (computing)Environmental healthMedicinePolitical scienceGeographyComputer securityEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The unique context of day-to-day living for people who are chronically homeless or living with housing insecurity puts them at high risk during community disasters. The impacts of extreme events, such as flooding, storms, riots, and other sources of community disruption, underscore the importance of preparedness efforts and fostering community resilience. This study is part of larger initiative focused on enhancing resilience and preparedness among high risk populations. The purpose of this study was to explore critical issues and strategies to promote resilience and disaster preparedness among people who are homeless in Canada. A sample of interviews (n=21) from key informants across Canada was analyzed to explore existing programs and supports for homeless populations. The data was selected from a larger sample of (n=43) interviews focused on programs and supports for people who are at heightened risk for negative impacts during disasters. Qualitative content analysis was used to extract emergent themes and develop a model of multi-level collaboration to support disaster resilience among people who are homeless. The results indicate there is a need for more upstream continuity planning, collaboration and communication between the emergency management sector and community service organizations that support people who are homeless. Prioritization and investment in the social determinants of health and community supports is necessary to promote resilience among this high-risk population. The findings from this study highlight the importance of acknowledging community support organizations as assets in disaster preparedness. Day-to-day resilience is an ongoing theme for people who are chronically homeless or living with housing insecurity. Upstream investment to build adaptive capacity and collaborate with community organizations is an important strategy to enhance community resilience.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.408
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.128
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.304 · 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