Hospital-to-Shelter/Housing Interventions for Persons Experiencing Homelessness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Persons with lived and living experiences of homelessness (PWLEs) commonly use hospitals and emergency departments to access healthcare yet support for transitions from hospital to shelter/housing can be challenging to access. To improve the continuity of care and health outcomes for PWLEs who are being discharged from hospital, a more complete understanding of two hospital-to-shelter/housing programs in Metro Vancouver, Canada was sought. Using a community-based participatory research approach, we conducted in-depth interviews in-person or by phone. Participants included eight healthcare and shelter/housing decision-makers and providers and a convenience sample of ten program participants (two females and eight males who ranged in age from 31 to 74 years old; average = 50 years old). Data were analyzed in NVivo 12 to identify successes including: 1) achieving health stability and recovery following hospital discharge; 2) having privacy and freedom while in the program; 3) building relationships with providers; 4) having formal support to find housing; and 5) cross-sector relationships between providers. Challenges included: 1) limited availability of affordable and appropriate housing; 2) other guests’ ways of life; 3) complex needs versus limited after-care resources; and 4) inequities in program access. While hospital-to-shelter/housing programs can serve as intervention opportunities to connect PWLEs to permanent housing, discharge plans need to acknowledge the local limitations on housing availability and offer short-term options for patients who require sub-acute rest and convalescence.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 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".