Cited by 41Homelessness and Social IssuesHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskUrban and Rural Development Challenges

Identifying variability in permanent supportive housing: a comparative effectiveness approach to measuring health outcomes

Open access
Dickson-Gomez, Julia, Quinn, Katherine, Bendixen, Arturo, Johnson, Amy, Nowicki, Kelly, Ko Ko, Thant, Galletly, Carol·2017·American Journal of Orthopsychiatry

Abstract

Supportive housing has become the dominant model in the United States to provide housing to the chronically homeless and to improve their housing stability and health. Most supportive housing programs follow a "housing first" paradigm modeled after the Pathways to Housing program in New York City. However, components of housing first supportive housing models were poorly defined, and supportive models have varied considerably in their dissemination and implementation to other parts of the country. Recently, research has been conducted to determine the fidelity by which specific housing programs adhere to the Pathways Housing First model. However, evidence regarding which combination of components leads to better health outcomes for particular subpopulations is lacking. This article presents results from qualitative interviews with supportive housing providers in the Chicago, Illinois, metropolitan area. Supportive housing varied according to housing configuration (scattered-site vs. project-based) and service provision model (low-intensity case management, intensive case management and behavioral health), resulting in 6 basic types. Supportive housing programs also differed in services they provided in addition to case management and the extent to which they followed harm-reduction versus abstinence policies. Results showed advantages and disadvantages of each of the 6 basic types. Comparative effectiveness research may help identify which program components lead to better health outcomes among different subpopulations of homeless. Future longitudinal research will use the identified typology and other factors to compare the housing stability and health outcomes of supportive housing residents in programs that differ along these dimensions. (PsycINFO Database Record

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/ort0000232

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Single-site housing settings could also make it challenging to reduce alcohol use due to other tenants' social use of alcohol.

    “Single-site housing settings could also make it challenging to reduce alcohol use due to other tenants' social use of alcohol (Collins et al., 2012b); a finding consistent with the perspectives of Housing First service providers (Dickson-Gomez et al., 2017).”

    From Harm reduction outcomes and practices in Housing First: A mixed-methods systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as Dickson-Gomez et al., 2017

  • A harm reduction approach involved use of an 'eviction prevention intervention' in response to drug dealing and harm to others due to substance use, wherein case managers liaise with landlords with the tenant present to advocate for another chance.

    “A harm reduction approach involved use of an 'eviction prevention intervention' in response to drug dealing and harm to others due to substance use, wherein case managers liaise with landlords with the tenant present to advocate for another chance”

    From Harm reduction outcomes and practices in Housing First: A mixed-methods systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as Dickson-Gomez et al. (2017)

  • Provision of guidance to use substances in tenants' apartments as opposed to in the halls, lobby, or front of the building is a harm reduction practice.

    “Provision of guidance to use substances in tenants' apartments as opposed to in the halls, lobby, or front of the building”

    From Harm reduction outcomes and practices in Housing First: A mixed-methods systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as Dickson-Gomez et al. (2017)

  • Scattered-site housing models could prevent recurrent homelessness when eviction prevention interventions are unsuccessful by supporting tenants to move into units in other buildings.

    “Scattered-site housing models could prevent recurrent homelessness when eviction prevention interventions are unsuccessful by supporting tenants to move into units in other buildings”

    From Harm reduction outcomes and practices in Housing First: A mixed-methods systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as Dickson-Gomez et al. (2017)

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Boejie H 2010 Analysis in qualitative research Thousand Oaks, California SAGE Publications
  2. Gulcur L Stefancic A Shinn M Tsemberis S Fischer S 2003 Housing, hospitalization, and cost outcomes for homeless individuals with psychiatric disabilities participating in continuum of care and housing first programs Journal of Community and Applied Social Psycholog 13 171 186
  3. Hwang SW Gogosis E Chambers C Dunn JR Hoch JS Aubry T 2011b Health status, quality of life, residential stability, substance use, and health care utilization among adults applying to a supportive housing program Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine 88 6 1076 1090 21638115 PMC3232412
  4. Schiff JW Schiff RA 2014 Housing first: paradign or program? Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless 23 2 80 104

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dickson-Gomez, J., Quinn, K., Bendixen, A., Johnson, A., Nowicki, K., Ko Ko, T., & Galletly, C.
Venue
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry
Published
2017
Volume
87
Issue
4
Pages
414-424
ISSN
  • 0002-9432 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-0025
OpenAlex
W2594958699
Cited by
41
References
29
Citations by year
2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
FWCI
6.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Orthopsychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P30MH052776)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA038085)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Homelessness and Social Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
  • Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Urban and Rural Development Challenges
Keywords
supported housing, chronic homelessness, Housing First, implementation fidelity, program typology, case management, harm reduction, behavioral health services, housing stability, health outcomes
MeSH terms
Attitude of Health Personnel, Chicago, Health Services, Ill-Housed Persons, Humans, Public Housing, Program Evaluation, Program Development, Comparative Effectiveness Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review