MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6977927389 · doi:10.64336/001c.129567

Digital solutions for adolescent homelessness: a review of health and technological interventions

2025· article· en· W6977927389 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High School Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityDoug Bragg Enterprises (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionMental healthDigital healthQualitative researchDropout (neural networks)Sample (material)Key (lock)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Homelessness has profound and far-reaching effects on youth, often resulting in severe physical and mental health challenges. While there is substantial research on the mental health consequences of homelessness among youth, there is a notable gap in the literature concerning the efficacy and availability of current interventions designed to support this vulnerable population. This study aimed to address this gap by providing a comprehensive overview of existing digital interventions for homeless youth, given the rapid evolution of technology. Through a meticulous synthesis of quantitative and qualitative data, the study examined user behaviors, engagement patterns, and attitudinal surveys. Key aspects analyzed included sample sizes, technological solutions, study durations, dropout rates, features of the interventions, their aims, and the resulting outcomes. The analysis indicated that, although the implementation of Technology-Based Interventions (TBI) is a relatively new concept, it is both feasible and promising for future development. As part of this broad TBI, we propose the adoption and implementation of an app that funds the bail of first time homeless youth offenders. The funding is incentivized by providing tax credits to the donors.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High School ScienceSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207