MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3152805442

Retelling Stories of Resilience as a Counterplot to Homelessness: A Narrative Approach in the Context of Intensive Team-Based Housing Support Services

2021· article· en· W3152805442 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jordan P. Mills

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHousing FirstNarrativeSocial workContext (archaeology)AcknowledgementPublic relationsSociologyIntervention (counseling)Narrative therapyPsychological resiliencePsychologyMental healthMental illnessPolitical scienceSocial psychologyPsychotherapist
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the use of narrative practices in the context of a Housing First program operated by the Saskatoon Crisis Intervention Service to help people in the process of overcoming homelessness tell their stories in ways that make them stronger. Housing First is an evidence-based intervention that offers immediate provision of permanent housing and wrap-around supports to individuals with persistent mental illness and other complicating co-morbidities who are experiencing homelessness. The paper arises from my reflections on learning whilst on social work practicum. Through participating in the narrative practice, people overcoming homelessness richly described their knowledge, skills, and abilities in getting through difficult times. This was effective in helping people to reacquaint themselves with a sense of purpose in life, while the audiences gave greater authentication and acknowledgement to people’s hopes and dreams for the future. This revealed that I could work more effectively by supporting people’s own initiatives rather than attempting to “fix” problems. What stood out the most was how the presenting problems were so closely correlated to larger and often oppressive social discourses. The linking of lives through shared purposes contributes to a collective voice that can amplify social issues and reverberate outward on a larger scale in the pursuit of social justice.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.028
Scholarly communication0.0130.011
Open science0.0040.018
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHomelessness and Social Issues→French-language works237,207→