Nick Kerman, Sena Gok, John Sylvestre, John Ecker, Sihan Zhang, Stephen W. Hwang, Nicole Kozloff, Vicky Stergiopoulos
{"title":"Complexity among people experiencing homelessness: A scoping review of definitions and measurement approaches","authors":"Nick Kerman, Sena Gok, John Sylvestre, John Ecker, Sihan Zhang, Stephen W. Hwang, Nicole Kozloff, Vicky Stergiopoulos","doi":"10.1002/ajcp.70052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>People experiencing homelessness are often described as having “complex needs” for whom various health and housing interventions have been developed. However, there is no consensus on how this and similar terms are defined or measured. A prospectively registered scoping review was conducted to examine how “complexity” is defined and measured with people experiencing homelessness. Six academic databases were searched, along with several techniques for identifying grey literature and articles in unindexed journals. A total of 224 academic articles were included in the review (35 grey literature articles were included in a supplemental review). There were 220 definitions of complexity provided in 203 academic articles, which most commonly included mental illness and/or substance use problems. Physical health problems, multiple health conditions, justice system involvement and offending behaviours, health and social service use patterns, and type and characteristics of homelessness were also common. Three types of approaches for measuring complexity were identified in 29 articles: (1) instruments (primarily vulnerability indices and service prioritization tools), (2) risk adjustment/health resource prediction indices, and (3) study-specific algorithms and processes. Limited validation was common among the methodological approaches, with a few exceptions. Overall, the findings highlight how complexity is often underdefined, with limitations in its measurement.</p>","PeriodicalId":7576,"journal":{"name":"American journal of community psychology","volume":"77 1-2","pages":"19-36"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of community psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajcp.70052","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
People experiencing homelessness are often described as having “complex needs” for whom various health and housing interventions have been developed. However, there is no consensus on how this and similar terms are defined or measured. A prospectively registered scoping review was conducted to examine how “complexity” is defined and measured with people experiencing homelessness. Six academic databases were searched, along with several techniques for identifying grey literature and articles in unindexed journals. A total of 224 academic articles were included in the review (35 grey literature articles were included in a supplemental review). There were 220 definitions of complexity provided in 203 academic articles, which most commonly included mental illness and/or substance use problems. Physical health problems, multiple health conditions, justice system involvement and offending behaviours, health and social service use patterns, and type and characteristics of homelessness were also common. Three types of approaches for measuring complexity were identified in 29 articles: (1) instruments (primarily vulnerability indices and service prioritization tools), (2) risk adjustment/health resource prediction indices, and (3) study-specific algorithms and processes. Limited validation was common among the methodological approaches, with a few exceptions. Overall, the findings highlight how complexity is often underdefined, with limitations in its measurement.
期刊介绍:
The American Journal of Community Psychology publishes original quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research; theoretical papers; empirical reviews; reports of innovative community programs or policies; and first person accounts of stakeholders involved in research, programs, or policy. The journal encourages submissions of innovative multi-level research and interventions, and encourages international submissions. The journal also encourages the submission of manuscripts concerned with underrepresented populations and issues of human diversity. The American Journal of Community Psychology publishes research, theory, and descriptions of innovative interventions on a wide range of topics, including, but not limited to: individual, family, peer, and community mental health, physical health, and substance use; risk and protective factors for health and well being; educational, legal, and work environment processes, policies, and opportunities; social ecological approaches, including the interplay of individual family, peer, institutional, neighborhood, and community processes; social welfare, social justice, and human rights; social problems and social change; program, system, and policy evaluations; and, understanding people within their social, cultural, economic, geographic, and historical contexts.