MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408191754 · doi:10.1080/10852352.2025.2474908

Examining Harm Reduction in a Housing First for Youth Program for Youth Experiencing Homelessness and Concurrent Disorders in a Small Canadian City

2025· article· en· W4408191754 on OpenAlexaffabout
Victoria Rozycki, Carol Bryce, Margaret Douglin, Maritt Kirst

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsCanadian Mental Health AssociationWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarm reductionHousing FirstHarmPsychologyCriminologyPsychiatryEnvironmental healthMedicineMental healthPublic healthMental illnessNursingSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Housing First for Youth (HF4Y) is a youth-focused adaptation of the well-established Housing First (HF) approach to housing and service provision for individuals experiencing homelessness. Given that youth homelessness is associated with an increased likelihood of substance use issues, a central tenet of the HF4Y framework is the use of a harm reduction approach to substance use. However, research on HF4Y has yet to examine how harm reduction is specifically being implemented in these settings. This study addresses this gap by examining how the principles and philosophies of harm reduction were operationalized and implemented in an HF4Y program for youth experiencing homelessness and concurrent disorders. This study was part of a larger evaluation of a 5-year HF4Y research demonstration project - the Restart Project in Kelowna, British Columbia, and Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Eight program leaders and service providers at the Kelowna site were interviewed to gather their perspectives on harm reduction delivery within the HF4Y program. Additionally, program documents and case management materials were analyzed to examine how harm reduction was operationalized and implemented through the guiding tools and resources available to staff for program delivery. Findings highlighted several ways in which harm reduction was being delivered within the HF4Y program, including working with youth to ensure safe substance use; connecting youth to services in the community; providing youth with individualized support; reducing stigma around substance use; and empowering youth who use substances. Barriers to harm reduction delivery were also identified, including a lack of low-barrier housing for youth who actively use substances and the expectations of some landlords. These findings emphasize the need for increased advocacy for housing options for youth experiencing homelessness and substance use issues and further research to address other contextual factors promoting and limiting harm reduction delivery in HF programming.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.938

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Prevention & Intervention in the CommunitySame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207