UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO A REPORT ON THE REACH3 HEALTH AND HOUSING IN TRANSITION STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SIGNIFICANCE: This is the first study to report on longitudinal changes (i.e. changes over time) in the health and housing status of vulnerably housed and homeless people in Canada, and the first to compare their health outcomes. FOCUS: This study is tracking the health and housing status of 1,200 vulnerably housed and homeless single adults in Vancouver, Toronto, and Ottawa over a two-year period. We recruited 200 vulnerably housed adults and 200 homeless adults in each city (1,200 total), from shelters, meal programs, single room occupancy hotels, and rooming houses. WHAT’S NEXT: In 2009, we completed our first round of interviews with participants. In 2010 and 2011, we’ll conduct follow-up interviews, to see how – and why – participants ’ housing and health status have changed. This information will be useful to communities and decision-makers; our goal is to guide the development of effective programs and policies to prevent and end housing vulnerability and homelessness. WHO’S INVOLVED: Research partners from the Centre
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".