MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399781595 · doi:10.3390/youth4020059

More than a Roof and a Key Required: Exploration of Guiding Principles for Stabilizing the Housing Trajectories of Youth Who Have Experienced Homelessness

2024· article· en· W4399781595 on OpenAlexaffabout
Timothy de Pass, Oluwagbenga Dada, Joyce John, Mardi Daley, Chris Mushquash, Alex Abramovich, Skye Barbic, Tyler Frederick, Nicole Kozloff, Kwame McKenzie, Vicky Stergiopoulos, Nina Vitopoulos, Sean A. Kidd

Bibliographic record

VenueYouth · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsWellesley InstituteOntario Tech UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoLakehead UniversitySt. Michael's HospitalCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKey (lock)CriminologyPsychologySociologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Youth homelessness represents a persistent and significant challenge for service sectors with limited best practice guidance. Housing supports, in particular, are widely deployed, with the practice-oriented literature providing little detail regarding service design beyond broad domains such as employment support and life skills coaching. The present multiple case study investigation was designed to develop a preliminary understanding of the guiding principles that attend the development of interventions that support youth exiting homelessness in the Canadian context. These case studies were conducted with a diverse group of five organizations recognized as sector leaders, with findings considered in light of practice standards from the better-established adult housing literature. Key findings with respect to service models included the strategies used to provide flexible, culturally responsive, tailored services with an emphasis on specialist support. Implementation factors included the navigation of strategic partnerships, the use of data in capacity-building, and the benefits and drawbacks of larger, centralized service environments versus smaller, dispersed environments. Youth-specific considerations in housing stabilization models are highlighted. This work contributes to a growing body of literature that seeks to articulate best practices in the effort to address and prevent youth homelessness.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.011
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.212
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYouthSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207