Females and Housing First: An analysis of 18‐month outcomes in a randomized controlled trial
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The main objective of this research was to qualitatively examine the impacts of Housing First (HF) specifically on those participants who identified themselves as female in response to question asking what their gender was. The data analyzed are from a larger, muti‐site, randomized controlled trial. χ 2 analysis was used to compare the life changes (coded as positive, neutral, or negative) experienced by 64 females (42 HF and 22 TAU). An in‐depth qualitative analysis was conducted on 45 of these participants (23 HF and 22 TAU). Significantly more female HF participants reported making positive life changes from baseline to 18‐month than those in TAU. Relative to females in TAU, female HF participants reported a number of specific positive changes, including enhanced safety, improved recovery in mental illness, greater reductions in drug use, and individual changes. The implications of findings for strengthening HF programs to meet the unique needs of female participants are discussed.
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.
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 | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 it