Homeless youth with intellectual disabilities: Precarious lives and health inequalities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Youth with intellectual disabilities experiencing homelessness are invisible within multiple service sectors. We know little about their experiences of homelessness, or the impacts of such on the social and physical health and well‐being. Methods We used quantitative and qualitative methods to measure prevalence and learn from key informants and homeless youth with intellectual disabilities about factors leading to and sustaining homelessness, and the implications of such on their social, physical, and mental health and well‐being. The project involved seven co‐researchers with intellectual disabilities and experience of youth homelessness in research design, data collection, analysis, and dissemination. We created Forum Theatre scenes that creatively represent the findings of the project. In this paper we share one of those scenes, as well as the recommendations three co‐researchers with intellectual disabilities have for improving support to homeless youth with intellectual disabilities. Findings Lack of awareness of and about homeless youth with intellectual disabilities, combined with siloed ways of working by involved sectors, results in significant disadvantage and health inequities for youth. Also revealed was the likelihood this would continue given existing obstacles to accessing appropriate housing and supports to exit homelessness. Conclusion Services providers, policy makers and representatives of the involved sectors need to recognize and acknowledge homeless youth with intellectual disabilities and take responsibility for learning and working together to develop integrated and responsive approaches to effectively supporting them.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".