PROTOCOL: A comprehensive review of prioritized interventions to improve the health and wellbeing of persons with lived experience of homelessness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Worldwide, over 1.8 billion people lack adequate housing and almost 25% of the world's urban population reside in informal accommodation (United Nations Human Rights Council, 2019)."People with a lived experience of homelessness" is a term coined to describe individuals who are, have been, or at risk of becoming homeless.This population lacks stable, permanent, appropriate housing, or may be without immediate prospect, means and ability to acquire it.Such physical living situations can include emergency shelters or provisional accommodations (Canadian Observatory on Homelessness, 2017).This population continues to grow, giving rise to a major international clinical and public health priority.Homelessness is strongly associated with high levels of morbidity (Hwang, Wilkins, Tjepkema, O'Campo, & Dunn, 2009) and mortality (Nordentoft & Wandall-Holm, 2003).People with lived experience of homelessness are at an increased risk for acute illnesses, such as traumatic injury ---------------------------
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 | 0.038 | 0.066 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.123 | 0.015 |
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".