Experiences of belonging following homelessness: a systematic review and meta-aggregation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Belonging is a human need and an essential component of community integration following homelessness. Little is known about the range of studies exploring experiences of belonging following homelessness. We conducted this systematic review and meta-aggregation to address this gap using Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines (PRISMA). We searched seven databases (EMBASE; PsychINFO; CINAHL; Medline; AMED; Nursing and Allied Health Database; and Sociological Abstracts), combining three main concepts: 1) homelessness; 2) belonging; and 3) transition. The search identified 2504 titles and abstracts. Of these, we included 33 studies in our review and meta-aggregation. Our meta-aggregation generated four themes describing experiences of belonging following homelessness: 1) developing a sense of belonging is a challenging process in the transition to housing; 2) shifting connections and finding new belonging; 3) belonging through engaging in meaningful activities; and 4) housing as a foundation for connection. These findings indicate that housing stability creates opportunities to belong but developing a sense of belonging is a difficult process involving changes in social networks facilitated by engaging with others in meaningful activities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".