Employment of the Homeless After Drug Abuse Treatment With Abstinent Contingent Housing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examine the employment of cocaine-using homeless persons, all with non-psychotic mental disorders, who participated in one of four separate randomized controlled clinical trials that offered treatments with various combinations of day treatment counseling, subsidized work therapy, or abstinence contingent housing. Randomized urine testing was used to determine abstinence status. Self-reports of employment are compared to quarterly state unemployment insurance tax records to determine the extent of participation in the underground and aboveground economy. The insurance tax records are capable of tracking a person both before and after initiation of treatment. Self-report of employment is limited to 2, 6 and 12 months after initiation of treatment. We estimate the probability that an individual self-reports employment in a quarter compared to the probability of an employer making an unemployment tax payment on their behalf. Modeling controls for age, gender, education, the treatment arm to which the person was randomized and the individual's degree of compliance with treatment and abstinence achieved during treatment. Data are based upon the Homeless I, II, III and IV trials conducted in Birmingham Alabama from 1990 through 2002.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".