Unveiling the Pathways: Mapping and Understanding Hidden Homelessness Among 2SLGBTQ+ Youth in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transphobic and homophobic violence and discrimination within homes and housing programs lead many 2-Spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (2SLGBTQ+) youth to find alternative, temporary, and insecure housing. These types of living situations are considered “hidden homelessness”. This study interviewed 2SLGBTQ+ youth (n = 6) and key informants (n = 12) who have experienced and/or who support hidden homelessness across three sites in Ontario (Toronto, York Region, and London). The results suggest experiences of hidden homelessness for 2SLGBTQ+ youth are nonlinear, with pathways driven by family conflict combined with the high cost of living and lack of employment, making independent living unaffordable. Additionally, youth avoid services where they experience discrimination and often experience social isolation. In rural and suburban areas, youth have fewer options for safe and inclusive services. When services are accessible, wrap-around supports that address the complexity of their situations help youth exit hidden homelessness. Prevention strategies should focus on addressing family conflict and supporting reunification when it is safe to do so. For those who are unable to return home, there is a need for increased financial support and more affordable housing. Building comprehensive population-based support services is recommended to address the overrepresentation of 2SLGBTQ+ youth experiencing 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 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 | 0.001 | 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".