MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415668029 · doi:10.1007/s11524-025-01016-4

Homelessness Following Jail Exit Among Previously Housed Individuals

2025· article· en· W4415668029 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Emily E. Ager, Meghan Hewlett, Dallas Augustine, Hemal K. Kanzaria, Kenneth Pérez, Jacob M. Izenberg, Maria C. Raven

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Urban Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of California, San Francisco
KeywordsSupportive housingPrisonQuarter (Canadian coin)OddsHousing FirstCriminal justicePublic housingBehavioral Risk Factor Surveillance SystemPublic healthMental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Incarceration is a recognized risk factor for homelessness. However, most research focuses on the relationship between homelessness and prison incarceration. Jail incarceration is more common compared to prison incarceration, but little data exists on its impact on housing. The objective of this study is to examine the occurrence of housing loss after jail incarceration among individuals without prior evidence of homelessness and the associated risk of reincarceration. In this retrospective cross-sectional study, we identified adults without evidence of homelessness who became unhoused within 6 months of jail incarceration. We compare pre-incarceration emergent and urgent health and social services utilization among housed and unhoused individuals, as well as the risk of reincarceration. Data are from the San Francisco (SF) Department of Public Health Coordinated Care Management System linked with SF City and County criminal justice data during fiscal years 2015-2018. We find that a quarter (25.1%) of individuals lost housing after jail incarceration, with a median incarceration length of 4 days in both the housed and unhoused groups. Compared to those without evidence of housing loss, more unhoused individuals had pre-incarceration substance use and mental health diagnoses and related service utilization. Unhoused individuals had 1.9 greater odds of reincarceration. In conclusion, we find that a significant number of individuals had evidence of housing loss after even a short jail incarceration; behavioral health diagnoses were more common among this group. Housing loss was associated with subsequent reincarceration. Given our findings, jail re-entry programs would benefit from incorporating housing assistance and housing loss mitigation strategies.

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)0.004
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 score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.870

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.373 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Urban HealthSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207