Health Care Access and Utilization by Homeless Adolescents in New York City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To date, little data has been collected from homeless adolescents regarding their access to, and utilization of, health care. In this study, 68 adolescents aged 16-25 were interviewed after being randomly selected from among those who came to a drop-in center for homeless youth in New York City in July 1996. The interviews followed a standardized questionnaire designed to collect demographic information as well as to assess past and current use of medical services. Prior to homelessness, 68% of subjects had been utilizing medical services on a regular basis, and the principal sources of care were as follows: hospital clinics, 51%; community health centers, 33%; and private physician offices, 22% (with more than one facility utilized in some cases). By contrast, 90% of participants reported having received care during homelessness, 68% of whom obtained regular health care at shelters, 32% at drop-in centers, and 25% at hospital clinics. Despite the fact that 42.4% of the sample was covered by health insurance at the time of interview, only 10% of subjects reported having ever been denied health care at any facility visited. Taken together, these findings suggest that, in the population studied, an increase in the percentage of adolescents regularly utilizing medical services occurs upon homelessness, coincident with a shift in utilization from hospital clinics and community health centers to shelters and drop-in centers. These results clearly warrant further study on the access and utilization of health care by homeless adolescents. If substantiated, the present findings call fo renewed efforts toward optimizing health care delivery to homeless adolescents at shelters, drop-in-centers, and other such facilities where these individuals utilize medical resources most frequently.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".