MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2773513142 · doi:10.1177/0192513x17746709

A Qualitative Study of the Pathways Into and Impacts of Family Homelessness

2017· article· en· W2773513142 on OpenAlexafffundabout
John Sylvestre, Nick Kerman, Alexia Polillo, Catherine M. Lee, Tim Aubry, Konrad Czechowski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Issues · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersInstitute of Population and Public Health
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Isolation (microbiology)Qualitative researchPsychologyDevelopmental psychologySociologyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Homelessness has consequences for families, including risk of deterioration in the health of their members, disruption of family dynamics, and separation of parents and children. This study used qualitative interviews to explore pathways into and perceived consequences of homelessness among 18 families living in an emergency family shelter system in Canada. Findings showed that families’ experiences prior to their homelessness were characterized by vulnerability, instability, and isolation. In the emergency shelter system, families faced new challenges in environments that were restrictive, noisy, chaotic, and afforded little privacy. Participants described a further disruption of relationships and described having to change their family practices and routines. Despite the challenges that families encountered, some participants felt optimistic and hopeful about the future. Future research is needed on ways in which shelters can be more hospitable, supportive, and helpful for parents and their families to minimize negative impacts and facilitate timely rehousing of families.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.351 · 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

Citations31
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family IssuesSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207