MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3076197966 · doi:10.12927/hcpol.2020.26294

Hospital Discharge Planning for People Experiencing Homelessness Leaving Acute Care: A Neglected Issue

2020· article· en· W3076197966 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Jesse Jenkinson, A. A. Wheeler, Louisa Pires

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare policy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Transportation of OntarioHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreMcGill University Health CentrePublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsDischarge planningHospital dischargeAcute careMedicineHealth careAcute hospitalNursingPatient dischargeMedical emergencyMEDLINEIntensive care medicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

People experiencing homelessness have worse health outcomes than the general population and limited access to primary/preventative healthcare. This leads to high hospital readmission rates. Effective discharge planning can improve recovery rates and reduce hospital costs. However, most hospital discharge policies and best practice guidelines are not tailored to patients with no fixed address, contributing to inappropriate discharges and health inequities for people experiencing homelessness. We discuss the lack of discharge policies, identifiable processes or plans specifically tailored to this population as a healthcare and policy gap, and we identify key areas for better understanding and addressing this issue.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.387 · 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

Citations33
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare policySame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207