Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sir – Elise Roy and colleagues (July 4, p 32) report on mortality among street youth in Montreal, Canada. They found standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) among street youth aged 14–25 years (n=10) were almost 12 times that of the general population (11·67/1). As is the case in North America, while there is some evidence of the morbidity of the homeless in Britain, little is known about their death rates as compared with the general population. However, a charity for the homeless, Crisis, has published details of deaths among Londoners who were classified as being of no fixed abode on their death certificates, with information on age and sex. From these data it is possible to calculate SMRs for male rough sleepers in London. The number of rough sleepers is taken from the 1991 Census. There are undoubtedly many difficulties with the reliability of these data; it is impossible to calculate with great accuracy death rates for this indeterminate and mobile population. The results in the table are, however, the first to be calculated for a UK sample, and suggest that the death rates of male rough sleepers aged 16–29 years are almost 40 times those of the general population. For all men aged 16–64 years, this number is about 25 times greater (SMR=2587). Although it is not surprising that rough sleepers have higher death rates than the general housed population, the magnitude of the difference noted here is startling. In the light of the fact that homelessness seems to be becoming a permanent feature of society, this high rate is cause for grave concern.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".