Clinically significant substance use and residential stability among homeless or vulnerably housed persons in Canada: a longitudinal cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We examined clinically significant substance use among homeless or vulnerably housed persons in three Canadian cities and its association with residential stability over time using data from the Health and Housing in Transition study. METHODS: In 2009, 1190 homeless or vulnerably housed individuals were recruited in three Canadian cities and followed for 4 years. We collected information on housing and incarceration history, drug and alcohol use, having a primary care provider at baseline and annually for 4 years. Participants who screened positive for substance use at baseline were included in the analyses. We used a generalized logistic mixed effect regression model to examine the association between clinically significant substance use and residential stability, adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: Initially, 437 participants met the criteria for clinically significant substance use. The proportion of clinically significant substance use declined, while the proportion of participants who achieved residential stability increased over time. Clinically significant substance use was negatively associated with achieving residential stability over the 4-year period (AOR 0.7; 95% CI 0.57, 0.86). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of homeless or vulnerably housed individuals, clinically significant substance use was negatively associated with achieving residential stability over time, highlighting the need to better address substance use in 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 | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 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".