Vivre dans le chaos: redéfinition des dimensions écologiques du suicide chez les jeunes femmes et fems subissant une injustice relative à leur logement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Suicidality among young women and femmes facing housing injustice is an urgent yet under-explored public health issue in Canada. This study highlights the invisibility of “hidden homelessness” and moves beyond individual risk factors to examine how structural, relational, and political forces shape distress. Using narrative inquiry and life history methods, the research identifies four key themes: 1. When a Non-No is a Yes, 2. Unsavoury People and Other Ruptures, 3. Inconsistency and Bouncing Around, and 4. Organized Abandonment and Chaos, Chaos, Chaos, Chaos. These themes elucidate the intersections of gendered violence, systemic neglect, and organized abandonment in shaping suicide risk and survival strategies. The study advocates for justice-oriented, non-coercive approaches to suicide prevention, and emphasizes relational trust and policies that address housing injustice. Strengths, limitations, and future research directions are also discussed.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".