MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2568407874 · doi:10.1080/14999013.2016.1255281

History of Forensic Mental Health Service Use Among Homeless Adults with Mental Illness

2017· article· en· W2568407874 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alicia Nijdam‐Jones, Tonia L. Nicholls, Anne G. Crocker, Laurence Roy, Julian M. Somers

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Forensic Mental Health · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteBC Mental Health & Substance Use ServicesUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental illnessMental healthPsychiatryForensic scienceMental health servicePsychologyForensic psychiatryClinical psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forensic service use was examined using self-report interview data from a prospective study of homeless persons with mental illness ( N = 435) and administrative file review data from a Canadian forensic system. Of the study's participants, 41% had contact with forensic services, 40% had contact with community clinics, and 20% had been admitted to the forensic hospital. Forensic involvement was associated with age, gender, disorder, impulse control and social network. Most participants with forensic contacts received services for minor, mostly poverty-related offenses. Findings highlight the need for early intervention for individuals with severe mental illness as one mechanism for preventing crime.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.341 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Forensic Mental HealthSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207