Recovery Education for Adults Transitioning From Homelessness: A Longitudinal Outcome Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Grounded in principles of adult education, Recovery Education Centres (RECs) hold promise in promoting recovery for adults with mental health challenges, but research on recovery outcomes for hard-to-reach populations participating in RECs is scant. This quasi-experimental study compares 12-month recovery outcomes of adults with histories of homelessness and mental health challenges enrolled in a REC, to those of participants of other community services for this population. Methods: This pre-post quasi-experimental study compared participants enrolled in a REC for people with histories of homelessness and mental health challenges (n = 92) to an age-and-gender frequency matched control group participating in usual services (n = 92) for this population in Toronto, Ontario. Changes from program enrollment to 12 months in personal empowerment (primary outcome), disease specific quality of life, recovery, health status, health related quality of life, and mastery were assessed. Post-hoc analyses compared subgroups with 1–13 h (n = 37) and 14+ h (n = 37) of REC participation during the study period to the control group. Linear mixed models estimated mean changes and differences in mean changes and 95% confidence intervals. Results: Mean change in perceived empowerment from program enrollment to 12 months in the intervention group [0.10 (95% CI: 0.04, 0.15)] was not significantly different from the control group [0.05 (−0.01, 0.11)], mean difference, 0.05 [(−0.03, 0.13), P = 0.25]. In the post-hoc analysis, the mean change in perceived empowerment for the intervention subgroup with 14+ h of REC participation [0.18 (0.10, 0.26)] was significantly different than in the control group [0.05 (−0.01, 0.11)] mean difference, 0.13 [(0.03, 0.23), P < 0.01]. Mean change in mastery was also significantly different for the intervention subgroup with 14+ h of REC participation [2.03 (1.04, 3.02)] vs. controls [0.60 (−0.15, 1.35)], mean difference, 1.43 [(0.19, 2.66), P = 0.02]. There were no significant differences in other outcomes. Conclusion: With sufficient hours of participation, recovery education may be a helpful adjunct to health and social services for adults with mental health challenges transitioning from homelessness.
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 | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".