Social Support, Depression and Self-Reported Physical Health in Persons Waiting for Access to Subsidized Housing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Housing is a pervasive determinant of physical and mental health. Studies indicate the importance of social support to the mental and physical health of individuals who are unhoused; however, to date, little is known about this relationship in persons who are housed in unaffordable accommodations. As the demand for subsidized housing continues to increase far beyond sustainable levels in many countries, investigations of the implications of social support on the health and wellbeing of those waiting for access to subsidized accommodations becomes important to generate evidence-based policy responses. Using data from the NB Housing Study, this paper presents an analysis of the relationships between perceived social support, depression, and self-reported physical health in individuals who wait for access to subsidized housing in New Brunswick, Canada ( n = 271). Hierarchical linear regression of Oslo Social Support Scale (OSSS-3) scores on Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale 10 (CES-D-10) scores and of OSSS-3 scores on self-reported physical health scores finds increases in social support are associated with decreased depression ( F [1, 260] = 26.34, p < .001, R 2 = .32) and greater physical health ( F [1, 260] = 7.62, p = .006, R 2 = .15). The findings indicate a need to focus on health interventions that improve mental and physical health alongside social support. Implications for programming, policy, and future research 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".