Risk factors for homelessness and housing instability in the first episode of mental illness: Initial findings from the <scp>AMONT</scp> study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: People living with mental illness are more likely than the general population to experience adverse housing outcomes, including homelessness. The aim of the current study is to examine residential status when participants have their first contact with mental health services, and the correlates of residential status at that moment. METHODS: First-time mental health service users were recruited from seven clinical sites across Québec. Data on residential status at entry in the project, as well as demographic, clinical and social variables, were collected using self-report and interviewer-rated questionnaires. Participants were classified as 'Homeless', 'At risk of homelessness' and 'Stably Housed', and correlates of residential status were identified through multivariate logistic regression and unbiased recursive partitioning. RESULTS: Among the 478 participants, 206 (43.1%) were in stable housing, 171 (35.8%) were at risk of homelessness and 101 (21.1%) were classified as homeless. Placement in a youth protection facility was strongly associated with adverse housing outcomes, while having a high school diploma and more social support were associated with more stable housing situations. CONCLUSIONS: First-time mental health service users are likely to experience a range of adverse housing situations, indicating the potential for clinical sites to implement homelessness primary prevention strategies. Factors related to family, foster care and schooling seem to be particularly salient in understanding risk of homelessness in first-time mental health service users, calling for intersectoral action to prevent adverse psychosocial outcomes in this population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".