From Coping to Resilience: How Youth with Lived Experience of Homelessness Cope with Stressful Experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Homelessness presents numerous challenges for youth, including physical health issues, mental health problems, substance use, victimization, legal issues, and dropping out of school. Despite these challenges, youth display significant resilience. Using data from a randomized controlled trial on Housing First for Youth, this study examines qualitative narratives delving into the process of resilience (i.e., stressors, coping, and positive adaptation) among 21 youth over one year. Stressors varied among participants, with childhood abuse and instability being the most prominent. Coping mechanisms included creating barriers with unhealthy relationships, rebuilding relationships, and reframing their circumstances. The findings provide an exploration of the resilience process for youth experiencing homelessness, emphasizing the importance of understanding how youth respond to stressors and adapt to their environment. Additionally, this study highlights the significance of community and relationship-based coping strategies alongside individual approaches, thus displaying the pivotal role of community support in fostering resilience among homeless youth.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".