Interactions between Police and Persons Who Experience Homelessness and Mental Illness in Toronto, Canada: Findings from a Prospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe interactions between police and persons who experience homelessness and serious mental illness and explore whether housing status is associated with police interactions. METHOD: We conducted a secondary analysis of 2008 to 2013 data from the Toronto, Canada, site of the At Home/Chez Soi study. Using police administrative data, we calculated the number and types of police interactions, the proportion of charges for acts of living and administration of justice, and the proportion of occurrences due to victimization, involuntary psychiatric assessment, and suicidal behavior. Using generalized estimating equations, we estimated the odds of police interaction by housing status. RESULTS: This study included 547 adults with mental illness who were homeless at baseline. In the year prior to randomization, 55.8% of participants interacted with police, while 51.7% and 43.0% interacted with police in Study Years 1 and 2, respectively. Of 2,228 charges against participants, 12.6% were due to acts of living and 21.2% were for administration of justice. Of 518 occurrences, 41.1% were for victimization, 45.6% were for mental health assessment, and 22.2% were for suicidal behavior. The odds of any police interaction during the past 90 days was 47% higher for those who were homeless compared to those who were stably housed (95% CI 1.26 to 1.73). CONCLUSIONS: For people who experience homelessness and mental illness in Toronto, Canada, interactions with police are common. The provision of stable housing and changes in policy and practice could decrease harms and increase health benefits associated with police interactions for this population.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".