A Scoping Review on the Influence of Housing on the Health and Well-Being of People with a Spinal Cord Injury/Dysfunction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Despite the growing recognition of housing as a significant concern for individuals with a spinal cord injury/dysfunction (SCI/D), there is limited research available on this topic. This scoping review aimed to identify and describe the literature on housing across the continuum for people with an SCI/D. Methods: This review utilized Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review framework. Five databases were searched including MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL Plus (EBSCO), PsycINFO (Ovid), and Web of Science (Core Collection). In addition, Google’s Advanced Search function was used to search the gray literature, and reference lists from the included studies were scanned. A preliminary assessment of the Theory of Access (TOA) constructs and their relationships was conducted using Penchansky and Thomas’ Theory of Access and Saurman’s additional updates. An adapted version of this theory was developed by the research team to identify the types of studies that assess the TOA’s six constructs and was used to identify knowledge gaps to advance research in this field. Results: The search yielded 25,861 records, with 36 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Data analysis revealed the participants’ sociodemographic and impairment characteristics, as well as essential information pertaining to housing across the continuum for individuals with an SCI/D, both of which were inconsistently reported across the studies. Several studies (n = 18) reported on the influence of home adaptations on the health and well-being of individuals with an SCI/D. When framed within the TOA, issues of accessibility presented the most substantial barriers for the SCI/D community, followed by acceptability and availability. Conclusions: The findings of this scoping review suggest that housing is an understudied topic and that further research is required to generate evidence to better support the housing needs of individuals with an SCI/D globally.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".