Cognitive Impairment in Marginally Housed Youth: Prevalence and Risk Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Homeless and marginally housed youth are particularly vulnerable members of society, and are known to experience numerous health problems, including psychiatric illness, substance use and viral infection. Despite the presence of these risk factors for cognitive compromise, there is limited research on the cognitive functioning of homeless and marginally housed youth. The present study examines the degree and pattern of cognitive impairment and associations with key risk factors in a sample of marginally housed young adults. Method: Participants (N =101) aged 20-29 years old were recruited from single-room occupancy hotels, and underwent cognitive, psychiatric, neurological, and serological assessments. Results: Forty percent of participants were identified as mildly cognitively impaired across multiple domains, and 16% were moderately-severely impaired. Deficits in memory and attention were most prevalent, while impairments in inhibitory control and cognitive flexibility were also present but tended to be less severe. Developmental and historical factors (premorbid cognitive functioning, neurological soft signs, earlier exposure to and longer duration of homelessness or marginal housing), as well as current health risks (stimulant dependence and hepatitis C exposure), were associated with cognitive impairment. Conclusions: The strikingly high rate of cognitive impairment in marginally housed young adults represents a major public health concern and is likely to pose a significant barrier to treatment and rehabilitation. These results suggest that the pathway to cognitive impairment involves both developmental vulnerability and modifiable risk factors. This study highlights the need for early interventions that address cognitive impairment and risk factors in marginalized young people.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".