MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7055428797

Child Welfare and Youth Homelessness in Canada: A Proposal for Action

2017· report· en· W7055428797 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2017
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Design and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWelfareNeglectDisadvantageWelfare systemChild protectionPopulationIndigenousChild abusePoverty
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the release of Without a Home: The National Youth Homelessness Survey (2016), we now have robust national data on youth homelessness for the first time in Canada. The research findings on the relationship between youth homelessness and child welfare involvement are unsettling:
\n
\n - 57.8% of youth experiencing homelessness reported some type of involvement with child protection services over their lifetime.
\n - 63.1% of youth who are homeless report experiencing childhood trauma, abuse, and/or neglect - a key cause of involvement with child welfare.
\n - 73.3% of youth who became homeless before the age of 16 reported involvement with child protection services.
\n - Compared to the general public (Statistics Canada, 2011), youth experiencing homelessness are 193 times more likely to have been involved with the child welfare system than the general public.
\n - 31.5% of youth who are homeless report their first contact with the welfare system at the age of 6, with 53% reporting continued involvement beyond the age of 16.
\n - Indigenous youth make up 7% of the total population of young Canadians, yet make up half of individuals involved in child protection services (Statistics Canada, 2011).
\n
\nImportantly, Without a Home also found that youth facing structural and systemic disadvantage (e.g., poverty, racism, homophobia) are more likely to experience both child welfare involvement and homelessness. For example, data indicates that LGBTQ2S, transgender, and gender nonbinary youth are more likely to have had child welfare involvement than cisgender and straight homeless youth.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.153 · 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