Housing and Stress: Examining the physical and mental health differences between homeless and formerly homeless individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines differences in physical and mental health between homeless individuals living in shelters, and formerly homeless individuals living in government-assisted housing. Utilizing Homelessness Management Information System (HMIS) data from Calgary, Canada, this study finds no significant difference in mental health between the two groups. However, regardless of housed status, past stress exposure negatively influences both current physical and mental health. Formerly homeless individuals in housing were more likely to report having a physical ailment compared to those in the homeless shelter. Furthermore, individuals in housing appear to have a greater exposure to stressors, yet their mental health is no worse than those in the homeless shelter. Housing may protect against the deleterious effects of cumulative stressors on current physical and mental health. This would appear to support the belief of Housing First policy, that access to housing is the first step to eliminating homelessness in an individual’s life. Keywords: Housing First approach; Homelessness; Housing policyRésuméCet article examine les différences en santé mentale et physique entre les personnes sans-abri et vivant dans des refuges pour les sans-abris, et les personnes qui auparavant étaient sans-abri et vivent présentement dans des logements subventionnés par le gouvernement. Cette étude utilise des données du Système d’information sur les personnes et les familles sans-abri de Calgary, Canada, pour conclure qu’il n’existe pas de différence significative en santé mental entre les deux groupes. Par contre, indépendamment de leur statuts de logement, avoir été exposé à des facteurs de stress dans le passé, affectait négativement la sante mentale et physiques des individus dans le présent. Les personnes vivants dans des logements subventionnés sont plus aptes à rapporter avoir des problèmes physiques comparer aux personnes vivants dans des refuges pour personnes sans-abri. De plus, les personnes vivants dans des logements subventionnés semblent avoir plus de facteurs de stress malgré le fait que leur santé mentale est tout aussi bonne que celle des personnes vivant dans des refuge pour personnes sans-abri. Avoir un logement pourrait protéger contre les effets néfastes des facteurs de stress cumulatifs sur la santé mentale et physique. Ces résultats semblent soutenir les politique suivant une approche « priorité au logement », qui propose qu’avoir accès a un logement est la première étape pour éliminer l’itinérance dans la vie des personnes sans-abri. Mots-Clefs: Approche priorité au logement; itinérance; politique de logement
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".