↓ Skip to main content

Public Health Care Utilization in a Cohort of Homeless Adult Applicants to a Supportive Housing Program

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Urban Health, June 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
Title
Public Health Care Utilization in a Cohort of Homeless Adult Applicants to a Supportive Housing Program
Published in
Journal of Urban Health, June 2006
DOI 10.1007/s11524-006-9083-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eric R. Kessell, Rajiv Bhatia, Joshua D. Bamberger, Margot B. Kushel

Abstract

Supportive housing is subsidized housing with on-site or closely linked services for chronically homeless persons. Most literature describing the effects of supportive housing on health service utilization does not describe use across multiple domains of services. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 249 applicants to a supportive housing program; 114 (45.7%) were housed in the program. We describe the pattern of service use across multiple domains (housing, physical health care, mental health care, substance abuse treatment). We examine whether enrollment in supportive housing was associated with decreased use of acute health services (emergency department (ED) and inpatient medical hospitalizations) and increased use of ambulatory services (ambulatory medical and generalist care, mental health, and substance abuse treatment) as compared to those eligible but not enrolled. Participants in both groups exhibited high rates of service utilization. We did not find a difference in change in utilization patterns between the two groups [those that received housing (intervention) and those that applied, were eligible, but did not establish residency (usual care group)] comparing the two years prior to the intervention to the two years after. The finding of high rates of maintenance of housing is, in itself, noteworthy. The consistently high use of services across multiple domains and across multiple years speaks to the level of infirmity of this population and the costs of caring for its members.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 89 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 22%
Researcher 17 18%
Other 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 21 23%
Unknown 15 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 27%
Social Sciences 21 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 10%
Psychology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 17 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 July 2022.
All research outputs
#2,697,926
of 22,772,779 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Urban Health
#342
of 1,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,800
of 52,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Urban Health
#8
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,772,779 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 52,720 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.