MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295362449 · doi:10.1111/hsc.13996

Mental health needs of homeless and recently housed individuals in Canada: A meta‐ethnography

2022· review· en· W4295362449 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bronte Diduck, Mikaela Rawleigh, Alexandra Pilapil, Erin Geeraert, Amanda T. Mah, Shu‐Ping Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth & Social Care in the Community · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthEmpowermentVictimisationContext (archaeology)PsychologyAutonomyPopulationQualitative researchGerontologyMedicinePsychiatrySociologyPoison controlSuicide preventionEnvironmental healthPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Homeless individuals are disproportionately likely to experience mental health conditions, and typically face many systemic barriers to access mental health services. This study sought to determine the mental health needs of homeless and recently housed individuals in Canada. A meta-ethnography was conducted to synthesise existing qualitative data and translate themes across a broader context. Thirty-five studies on the experiences of 1511 individuals with a history of homelessness were included. Themes were interpreted by comparing and contrasting findings across multiple contexts. Distinct, yet highly interrelated, unmet mental health needs were revealed through personal narratives of trauma, stigmatisation, victimisation, and a lack of basic necessities. Six themes that characterised this population's mental health needs were ontological security, autonomy, hope and purpose, empowerment, social connection and belonging, and access to services. This study revealed homeless individuals' unmet mental health needs to inform social and policy change and improve psychological well-being.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.011
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.300
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.190 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth & Social Care in the CommunitySame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207