MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6885040829 · doi:10.13140/rg.2.2.20432.93445/1

Addressing the Stigma of Homelessness Through Employment and Community Education: Experiences of Participating in Two Novel Initiatives in Kingston, Ontario, Canada

2024· report· en· W6885040829 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2024
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStigma (botany)Qualitative researchService providerPublic policySubstance useCommunity serviceQualitative propertySocial stigma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stigma is a serious issue affecting the lives of persons who experience homelessness and use substances. It influences every aspect of their daily lives including where they exist in public places, where they can live following homelessness, and access to housing, employment, and other opportunities that would enable thriving. In this report, we present the findings of two distinct studies which explore the experiences of administering or participating in two initiatives aimed at mitigating the stigma of homelessness in the lives of individuals who experience homelessness and use substances in Kingston, Ontario, Canada. These two initiatives were designed and led by Trellis HIV and Community Care in collaboration with a range of community agencies throughout the Kingston community and included: 1) the “Vocational Program,” an initiative aimed at providing accessible, low-barrier employment to individuals who are currently unhoused and engaged in active substance use; and 2) the “Support Not Stigma” workshop series, a series of seven workshops aimed at reducing stigma among service providers in services for individuals who experience homelessness and use substances. While this research was qualitative and not aimed at measuring the effectiveness of these interventions, our findings indicate that these two approaches were worthwhile initiatives that need to be implemented and evaluated in future implementation efforts. We provide several recommendations for research, policy and practice for consideration by researchers, policymakers and service providers in future efforts designed to reduce stigma in services and the broad Kingston community.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.411

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0430.012
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.328
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.093 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)→French-language works237,207→