MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4311026143 · doi:10.1111/bdi.13281

Staging the bipolar disorders: Are early stages too early a stage for intervention?

2022· letter· en· W4311026143 sur OpenAlexafffundabout
Anne Duffy, Charles Keown‐Stoneman

Notice bibliographique

RevueBipolar Disorders · 2022
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Établissements canadiensPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalQueen's University
Organismes subventionnairesCanadian Institutes of Health Research
Mots-clésWorryAnxietyBipolar disorderProdromePsychologyOverdiagnosisPsychiatryMoodHarmIntervention (counseling)Clinical psychologyMood disordersMedicinePsychosis

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In his Review, Parker questions the usefulness of a staging approach for bipolar disorders (BD) given the state of knowledge and warns of the risk of overdiagnosis and overtreatment of early stage presentations. Parker raises the point that childhood anxiety and sleep disorders are common, making it difficult to ascertain when these presentations represent antecedents to BD and that by identifying individuals at increased risk, unnecessary worry and possible stigma may ensue. Although concerns about going beyond the evidence are valid and core to the values of medicine to do no harm, a developmental approach to understanding the evolution of BD has been extremely informative, advancing both clinical practice and research. The Canadian Flourish longitudinal offspring study started in 19971 in direct response to questions from BD parents about the risk of illness in their children. At the time, there was insufficient data to inform accurate individual risk prediction together with an appreciation that, given the substantial genetic and phenotypic heterogeneity, the risk would vary significantly between families and among individuals within families. An unexpected finding from the Flourish offspring study was the elevated rate of childhood anxiety and sleep disorders in high risk children compared with children of well parents. The high-risk children came from mostly intact, middle-class families, with only one BD parent (i.e., the other parent had no lifetime history of mental illness). With the longer observation of more children over the peak risk period, we found evidence of an increased risk of major mood disorder of about 2.5-fold in high-risk offspring with, compared to those without, childhood anxiety and sleep disorders.2 This finding has since been independently replicated. In contradiction to concerns raised by Parker, parents found it helpful and reassuring to understand that the risk of their child(ren) developing BD was much lower than anticipated and that families could be signposted to low-intensity support when first indicated—which likely explains the low (under 10%) attrition over decades of observational research. Several groups around the world have invested in longitudinal studies of children at familial risk of mood disorders, and as a result, the approaches and precision of individualized risk prediction have advanced; taking into account heterogeneity, and being more honest about statistical uncertainty of predictions, largely related to sample sizes.3, 4 One concern raised by Parker is the possibility that variables used to assess the risk of BD may have non causal or indirect relationships with the onset of illness. While understanding causal mechanisms is important and may inform future directions in prevention and treatment, it is not necessary that variables used to assess risk be strictly causal in nature. In practice, the causal variable may be difficult to measure for various reasons; however, a proxy variable, confounded by the truly causal variable, will still contribute useful information in assessing future risk. Further, by taking a developmental approach to mapping psychopathology in children at confirmed familial risk, we have been able to develop a refined conceptual framework to advance progress in both clinical practice and research (Figure 1).5 The staging approach has provided evidence that while not all high-risk children who develop BD will manifest each and every clinical stage, a progressive forward sequence may be the most parsimonious trajectory. This developmental framework will advance studies of multi-level risk factors (epigenetic, neurobiologic, psychologic, sociologic) associated with illness onset and inform the timing and nature of prevention opportunities (i.e., parenting and family support, psychoeducation, psychosocial interventions). Interestingly, the model also considers differential trajectories and prevention needs based on familial BD subtypes: that is the developmental trajectory of episodic lithium-responsive BD compared with that of psychotic spectrum lithium-nonresponsive BD. Although we agree with Parker's concern regarding going beyond the evidence and possible misuse of the staging approach, having reliable data to inform more precise risk prediction, refined study designs to better understand BD onset, and developmentally tailored prevention targets is vital to improving outcomes—as seen in other areas of medicine such as cancer and cardiovascular care. Furthermore, understanding better one's own health risks can empower and motivate families and individuals to engage in self-management by reducing modifiable risk exposures (i.e., substance use), making healthy lifestyle choices (i.e., diet, exercise, and sleep), and strengthening resilience (i.e., healthy socioemotional coping, family functioning). In addition, identifying among children at familial risk those who might benefit most from closer monitoring and low-intensity prevention may improve outcomes. In fact, we branded our offspring research Flourish to emphasize that the majority of children at familial risk will not develop BD and highlight the importance of developmentally appropriate, common sense, low-intensity nonstigmatizing prevention with the potential for benefits that extend lifelong and possibly intergenerationally. As with most relatively novel approaches, we believe that staging models and risk calculators would benefit from further refinement and assessment in larger cohorts; however, this should not preclude their adoption in evidence-informed practice. Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Intégrité de la recherche, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,562
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,002
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,017
Tête enseignante GPT0,271
Écart entre enseignants0,254 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2022
Routes d'admission3
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBipolar DisordersMême sujetBipolar Disorder and TreatmentTravaux en français237 207