MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320810874 · doi:10.1061/nhrefo.nheng-1498

Promoting Emergency Response for Homeless Service Agencies: Field-Based Recommendations from Two Municipalities in Nova Scotia, Canada

2023· article· en· W4320810874 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jeff Karabanow, Haorui Wu, Kaitrin Doll, Catherine Leviten‐Reid, Jean Hughes

Bibliographic record

VenueNatural Hazards Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCape Breton UniversityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicPolitical scienceService (business)Emergency responsePublic relationsGeographyEconomic growthBusinessEnvironmental planningMedicineMedical emergencyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fast unfolding of the global COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected the homeless sector by triggering tremendous challenges for individuals experiencing homelessness (IEHs) and related service agencies. This quick-response research project qualitatively collected time-sensitive data from the IEHs and service stakeholders (SSs) experiences, challenges, efforts, and suggestions during the first wave of COVID-19 in the two most populated municipalities in the province of Nova Scotia, Canada, namely, Halifax Regional Municipality and Cape Breton Regional Municipality. Through analyzing and synthesizing the standpoints from both IEHs and SSs, this technical note presents recommendations, addressing the practical challenges that IEHs have been confronting during COVID-19 and systemic issues in which homelessness is rooted. These recommendations will assist community-based agencies in improving their emergency response capacity, better serving IEHs in COVID-19 in particular, and supporting other vulnerable and marginalized populations in future extreme events in general.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0150.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.369 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNatural Hazards ReviewSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207