MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402531681 · doi:10.4178/epih.e2024076

Homelessness and mortality: gender, age, and housing status inequity in Korea

2024· article· en· W4402531681 on OpenAlexaff
Gum‐Ryeong Park, Dawoon Jeong, Hojoon Sohn, Young Ae Kang, Hongjo Choi

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiology and Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaNational Health Insurance ServiceSeoul National UniversityNational Research Foundation
KeywordsMedicineEnvironmental healthDemographyGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: We compared mortality rates among various housing statuses within the homeless population and investigated factors contributing to their deaths, including housing status, gender, and age. METHODS: Using a comprehensive multi-year dataset (n=15,445) curated by the National Tuberculosis Screening and Case Management Programs, matched with the 2019-2021 Vital Statistics Death Database and National Health Insurance claims data, we calculated age-standardized mortality rates and conducted survival analysis to estimate differences in mortality rates based on housing status. RESULTS: The mortality rate among the homeless population was twice as high as that of the general population, at 1,159.6 per 100,000 compared to 645.8 per 100,000, respectively. Cancer and cardiovascular diseases were the primary causes of death. Furthermore, individuals residing in shelter facilities faced a significantly higher risk of death than those who were rough sleeping, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.70 (95% confidence interval, 1.37 to 2.11). This increased risk was especially pronounced in older adults and women. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlights the urgent need for targeted interventions, as the homeless population faces significantly higher mortality rates. Older adults and women in shelter facilities are at the highest risk.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.309
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiology and HealthSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207