MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2596553897

Discourse: The Politics of Home Care: Where Is Home"?

2016· article· en· W2596553897 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Joan M. Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Nursing Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertyHeadlineMetropolitan areaCensusPopulationGlobeMeaning (existential)NewspaperHealth careDemographyGeographyEconomic growthSocioeconomicsDemographic economicsSociologyMedicinePsychologyEconomicsMedia studiesBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What might be the meaning of home care for Bryan? Bryan's situation is by no means unique. As the health-care reform movement has gained momentum, and as the drive towards home-care management has accelerated, homelessness and poverty have become realities in the lives of many. An October 1997 headline in the Globe and Mail read, Shelters running out of space: Warning sounded as winter looms. That same year, it was estimated that about 5,350 people in Toronto slept in shelters each night, compared to about 3,970 the year before. And the newspaper article reported that it was not only single men who faced homelessness; shelters for women and children were also full (Matas & Philp, 1997). The crisis of homelessness reflects, among other social issues, a rise in urban poverty. Lee (2000), using data from the 1996 Census and Statistics Canada's Low Income Cut-offs to measure poverty, found that between 1990 and 1995, poor populations in metropolitan areas grew by 33.8%, far outstripping population growth (6.9%) for the same time period (p. xv). Moreover, certain population groups were more likely than others to be poor. The average poverty rate among all city

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0210.056
Scholarly communication0.0150.015
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0070.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.524
Teacher spread0.373 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Nursing ResearchSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207