MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2976669770 · doi:10.26190/unsworks/25911

Outcomes of the Inner City Youth at Risk Project July 2010 - June 2012

2013· article· en· W2976669770 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christine A. Eastman

Bibliographic record

VenueUNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisadvantagedGeneral partnershipGovernment (linguistics)MainstreamMental healthVoucherQuarter (Canadian coin)Economic growthPolitical scienceBusinessPublic relationsMedicinePublic administrationGeographyFinancePsychiatryEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Inner City Youth at Risk (ICYAR) Project is a partnership project which draws together 21 government and non-government organisations (NGOs) to target and respond to young people who are experiencing homelessness and/or at risk of homelessness in Kings Cross and surrounding areas in Sydney, New South Wales. Partners include mainstream health services, other government agencies, local government, and a range of youth and homelessness support agencies and NGOs. This report describes the activities and achievements of the project and the costs of providing services, based on the ICYAR database between 1st July 2010 and the 30th June 2012. Key findings are: (1) over the data collection period, 1145 instances of brokerage were provided to 487 clients, including 190 food vouchers, 157 housing set-up costs, 142 instances of emergency accommodation and 116 contributions towards education and vocation; (2) a quarter of all clients identified as being of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander origin. The average age at which clients first had contact with ICYAR was 22, and young men and women were equally represented; (3) the project is reaching its target client group of highly disadvantaged young people. The majority of clients experienced unstable accommodation (82.9 per cent). Around a third had mental health issues, and almost a third of clients had alcohol and other drug (AOD) issues. The majority of clients had multiple presenting issues; (4) access to brokerage is a highly valued component of the ICYAR service model, but average expenditure is quite low; and (6) the service model is regarded by partner agencies as effective and efficient, and their sustained participation over the life of the project reflects this.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.354
Threshold uncertainty score0.704

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia)Same topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207