↓ 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 (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 58 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 23%
Student > Master 14 23%
Other 6 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 16 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 34%
Social Sciences 16 26%
Unspecified 5 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Psychology 4 7%
Other 10 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 05 December 2014.
All research outputs
#1,741,171
of 12,389,284 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Urban Health
#233
of 931 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,826
of 275,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Urban Health
#4
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,389,284 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 931 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 275,085 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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 71% of its contemporaries.