MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286210911 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20210334

Challenges faced by people experiencing homelessness and their providers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study

2022· article· en· W4286210911 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Kathryn Hodwitz, Janet Parsons, Clara Juandó‐Prats, Esther Rosenthal, Amy Craig-Neil, Stephen W. Hwang, Joel Lockwood, Paul Das, Tara Kiran

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsThematic analysisPandemicAgency (philosophy)Public healthHealth careQualitative researchIsolation (microbiology)ReflexivityMedicinePsychologyGerontologyNursingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)SociologyPolitical scienceDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: People experiencing homelessness are vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection and its consequences. We aimed to understand the perspectives of people experiencing homelessness, and of the health care and shelter workers who cared for them, during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an interpretivist qualitative study in Toronto, Canada, from December 2020 to June 2021. Participants were people experiencing homelessness who received SARS-CoV-2 testing, health care workers and homeless shelter staff. We recruited participants via email, telephone or recruitment flyers. Using individual interviews conducted via telephone or video call, we explored the experiences of people who were homeless during the pandemic, their interaction with shelter and health care settings, and related system challenges. We analyzed the data using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Among 26 participants were 11 men experiencing homelessness (aged 28-68 yr), 9 health care workers (aged 33-59 yr), 4 health care leaders (aged 37-60 yr) and 2 shelter managers (aged 47-57 yr). We generated 3 main themes: navigating the unknown, wherein participants grappled with evolving public health guidelines that did not adequately account for homeless individuals; confronting placelessness, as people experiencing homelessness often had nowhere to go owing to public closures and lack of isolation options; and struggling with powerlessness, since people experiencing homelessness lacked agency in their placelessness, and health care and shelter workers lacked control in the care they could provide. INTERPRETATION: Reduced shelter capacity, public closures and lack of isolation options during the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the displacement of people experiencing homelessness and led to moral distress among providers. Planning for future pandemics must account for the unique needs of those experiencing 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207