Health Care While Homeless: Barriers, Facilitators, and the Lived Experiences of Homeless Individuals Accessing Health Care in a Canadian Regional Municipality
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Persons struggling with housing remain significantly disadvantaged when considering access to health care. Effective advocacy for their needs will require understanding the factors which impact their health care, and which of those most concern patients themselves. A qualitative descriptive study through the lens of a transformative framework was used to identify barriers and facilitators to accessing health care as perceived by people experiencing homelessness in the regional municipality of Niagara, Canada. In-person, semi-structured interviews with 16 participants were completed, and inductive thematic analysis identified nine barriers and eight facilitators. Barriers included affordability, challenges finding primary care, inadequacy of the psychiatric model, inappropriate management, lack of trust in health care providers, poor therapeutic relationships, systemic issues, and transportation and accessibility. Facilitators included accessibility of services, community health care outreach, positive relationships, and shelters coordinating health care. Knowledge of the direct experiences of marginalized individuals can help create new health policies and enhance the provision of clinical care.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.030 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it